KEVIN MORGAN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida appellate court affirmed conviction for attempted second-degree murder, holding that the trial court properly instructed the jury on attempted voluntary manslaughter and did not abuse its discretion in denying a for-cause challenge to a juror with concerns about guns.
A trial court does not commit fundamental error by instructing the jury on attempted voluntary manslaughter using language clarifying that conviction does not require proof of intent to kill, and does not abuse its discretion in denying a for-cause challenge when a juror expresses concerns about guns but confirms ability to decide the case on the facts.
[1] An attempted manslaughter instruction that clarifies conviction does not require proof of intent to kill is consistent with the 2008 amendment to standard jury instructio…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKevin Morgan was convicted of attempted second-degree murder. At trial, the court instructed the jury on attempted voluntary manslaughter using langua…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse For-Cause Challenge cases and more on FLexlaw
We affirm appellant’s conviction for attempted second degree murder, rejecting his contention that the trial court fundamentally erred in instructing the jury on attempted voluntary manslaughter. The instruction given by the trial court in this case included language clarifying that a conviction for attempted manslaughter by act does not require proof of an intent to kill. The attempted manslaughter instruction given by the trial court was thus consistent with the 2008 amendment to the standard jury instruction on manslaughter by intentional act, In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases-Report No. 2007-10, 997 So.2d 403, 403 (Fla.2008). See Montgomery v. State, -So.3d - (Fla. 1st DCA 2009), approved by 39 So.3d 252 (Fla.2010).
Appellant also raises the trial court’s denial of a challenge for cause to a juror. While the juror expressed strong feelings about guns, he ultimately advised that he could decide the case based upon the facts and set his objection to guns aside. “An appellate court reviews a trial judge’s decision on a for-cause challenge for an abuse of discretion.” See Carratelli v. State, 832 So.2d 850, 854 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). No abuse of discretion occurred.
Affirmed.
WARNER, TAYLOR and MAY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Riesel v. State, 48 So. 3d 885 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…terim (December 11, 2008 through April 8, 2010 or June 28, 2010) manslaughter instruction failed to eliminate the requirement that the jury find intent, the defect identified in State v. Montgomery, 39 So. 3d 252 (Fla.2010). But see Morgan v. State, 42 So. 3d 862 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). In 2010, the supreme court further modified the standard instruction for manslaughter, in order to remedy the problem identified in Montgomery. See In re Amendments to Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases—Instruction 7.7…
-
Daniels v. State, 72 So. 3d 227 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)…. (“Because the instruction given differs from the instruction given in Montgomery, and the jury was also instructed on manslaughter by culpable negligence, we find no fundamental error.”). The Third District’s Moore decision cites Morgan v. State, 42 So. 3d 862 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), review granted, 53 So. 3d 1021 (Fla.2011), for support. In Morgan, the Fourth District concluded that the instruction on attempted voluntary manslaughter “included language clarifying that a conviction for attempted manslaughter…
-
Baron Moore v. State, 57 So. 3d 240 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)…t the defendant had a premeditated intent to cause death, only an intent to commit an action'which caused death.” In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal [*245] Cases-Report No. 2007-10, 997 So. 2d 403, 403 (Fla.2008); see also Morgan v. State, 42 So. 3d 862, 863 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (concluding that the instruction given was consistent with the 2008 amendment to the standard jury instructions, the instruction given materially differed from the Montgomery instruction, and no fundamental error occurred).…
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
- State v. Montgomery, 39 So. 3d 252 (Fla. 2010)
- In re Standard Jury Instructions IN Crim. Cases-Report NO. 2007-10, 997 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 2008)
- Carratelli v. State, 832 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)