JOHN VALDES-PINO, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Manslaughter Instruction cases and more on FLexlaw
John Valdes-Pino appeals his conviction for second-degree murder asserting fundamental error in the manslaughter instruction given to the jury.1 We affirm the conviction.
On the record presented, we find that the then-standard instructions given by the trial court (without objection) did not constitute fundamental error. Zeigler v. State, 18 So.3d 1289 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). However, because the contrary analysis in Montgomery v. State, — So.3d-, 2009 WL 350624 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009), is currently pending review before the Florida Supreme Court,2 we certify decisional conflict with that First District opinion.
Affirmed. Direct conflict certified.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Milvio Coiscou v. State, 43 So. 3d 123 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)…e jury was only one-step removed from the necessarily included offense of manslaughter, the error is per se reversible. See Montgomery, 39 So. 3d at 259 (citing Pena v. State, 901 So. 2d 781 (Fla.2005)). We note this Court, in Valdes-Pino v. State, 23 So. 3d 871 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009), certified decisional conflict with the First District Court of Appeal’s opinion in Montgomery v. State, — So. 3d —, 2009 WL 350624 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). In light of the Florida Supreme Court’s approval of Montgomery, we conclude V…
-
Leggett v. State, 34 So. 3d 51 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)…manslaughter by intentional act. The jury was instructed on manslaughter by intentional act as a lesser included offense.* This court has held that there is no fundamental error in the giving of this standard jury instruction. Valdes-Pino v. State, 23 So. 3d 871 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009). The Valdes-Pino panel followed Zeigler v. State, 18 So. 3d 1239 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009), and certified direct conflict with Montgomery v. State, — So. 3d -, 34 Fla. L. Weekly D360 (Fla. 1st DCA Feb. 12, 2009), review granted, 11 So. 3…1 / 2
-
Mynor Solano v. State, 35 So. 3d 930 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)…a lesser included offense. [*934] See Montgomery, — So. 3d at —. This court has certified conflict with Montgomery, and has instead followed the Second District’s decision in Zeigler v. State, 18 So. 3d 1239 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). Valdes-Pino v. State, 23 So. 3d 871 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009); see also Bonilla v. State, 23 So. 3d 1256 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009). Assuming arguendo that Montgomery is correctly decided, the defendant would not be entitled to any relief under the fundamental error doctrine. That is so because the…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Alexander v. State, 11 So. 3d 943 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)