CASTRO GUERRA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 a second-degree murder conviction, holding that instructing the jury on both intentional-act manslaughter and culpable-negligence manslaughter as lesser included offenses does not constitute fundamental error even if the instruction on intentional-act manslaughter requires proof of intent to kill.
When a trial court instructs the jury on both manslaughter by intentional act and manslaughter by culpable negligence as lesser included offenses of second-degree murder, no fundamental error occurs even if the intentional-act instruction requires proof of intent to kill.
[1] When a defendant is charged with second-degree murder and the trial court instructs the jury on both manslaughter by intentional act and manslaughter by culpable negligen…
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 intelligenceCastro Guerra was charged with second-degree murder with a knife. The trial court instructed the jury on both manslaughter by intentional act (requiri…
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 Manslaughter By Culpable Negligence cases and more on FLexlaw
Castro Guerra appeals the trial court’s final judgment of conviction and sentence for second degree murder, alleging that the trial court committed fundamental error when it instructed the jury that to find the defendant guilty of manslaughter, a lesser included offense, the jury had to find that he had the intent to kill. Based on our prior decision in Cubelo v. State, 41 So.3d 263 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010), we affirm.
As in Cúbelo, Guerra was charged with second-degree murder with a weapon, a knife. Manslaughter is a category one lesser included offense of second-degree murder. Section 782.07(1) Fla. Stat. (2003), provides that the crime of manslaughter may be committed by (1) act; (2) procurement; or (3) the culpable negligence of the defendant. When instructing the jury as to manslaughter, the trial court instructed the jury as to manslaughter by intentional act and manslaughter by culpable negligence. In Cubelo, we relied on Salonko v. State, 42 So.3d 801 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) to conclude that because the jury was instructed on both manslaughter by act and manslaughter by culpable negligence, there was no fundamental error requiring reversal of the defendant’s conviction for second-degree murder. Cubelo, 41 So.3d at 268. Because Guerra also was charged with both manslaughter by act and manslaughter by culpable negligence, we conclude that there was no fundamental error requiring reversal of Guerra’s conviction for second-degree murder.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Baron Moore v. State, 57 So. 3d 240 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)…cond-degree murder. Id. at 268; see also Daniels v. State, 46 So. 3d 630, 630 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (finding no fundamental error where the manslaughter by culpable negligence instruction was also given, and distinguishing Montgomery); Guerra v. State, 44 So. 3d 226, 226 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (same); Salonko v. State, 42 So. 3d 801, 802-03 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (distinguishing Montgomery, noting that the jury was also instructed on culpable negligence, and finding no fundamental or reversible error).1 In the instant…
-
Jacquaile Hill v. State, 124 So. 3d 296 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)…ffense that was one step removed from second-degree murder. See Barros-Dias v. State, 41 So. 3d 370 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); Nieves v. State, 22 So. 3d 691 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Salonko v. State, 42 So. 3d 801 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010); see also Guerra v. State, 44 So. 3d 226 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (following Salonko); Cubelo v. State, 41 So. 3d 263 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (following Salonko). III. THE STATE’S ARGUMENT In a per curiam opinion in Haygood v. State, 54 So. 3d 1035 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011), quashed, 109 So. 3d 735 (Fla.2…
-
Leonel Munoz v. State, 61 So. 3d 1152 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)…o raise a fundamental error claim, pursuant to State v. Montgomery, 39 So. 3d 252 (Fla.2010). Based on our prior decisions in Cubelo v. State, 41 So. 3d 263 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010), Daniels v. State, 46 So. 3d 630 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010), and Guerra v. State, 44 So. 3d 226 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010), we deny the motion. Where the jury was instructed on both manslaughter by act and manslaughter by culpable negligence, there was no fundamental error requiring a reversal of the petitioner’s conviction. See Daniels, 46 So. 3d at…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Salonko v. State, 42 So. 3d 801 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)
- Baker v. McNEIL, 41 So. 3d 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)
- Cubelo v. State, 41 So. 3d 263 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)