SASCHA WEBER, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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.
Sascha Weber petitioned for post-conviction relief arguing his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise that the jury instruction for attempted manslaughter by act imposed an additional element of intent to kill, constituting fundamental error. The court agreed and reversed his conviction for attempted second-degree murder, vacating his sentence and remanding for a new trial.
Yes. Appellate counsel was ineffective in failing to argue that the standard attempted manslaughter by act instruction was fundamentally erroneous because it imposed an additional element of intent to kill, particularly where the initial brief was filed after the First District's controlling decision in Montgomery v. State.
[1] Appellate counsel is ineffective when failing to argue that a manslaughter by act instruction, given as a necessarily lesser included offense of second-degree murder with…
[2] A manslaughter by act instruction that erroneously imposes a requirement to find intent to kill constitutes fundamental error, which is per se reversible.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the standard attempted manslaughter by act instruction was fundamentally erroneous because it imposed an additional element of intent to kill”
Establishes the core legal error that appellate counsel failed to raise
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWeber was charged with attempted first-degree premeditated murder. He was convicted of attempted second-degree murder with a weapon, a category one le…
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 Intent To Kill Element cases and more on FLexlaw
Sascha Weber, in the sole ground in his petition filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(d), contends that his appellate counsel was ineffective in failing to argue that the standard instruction provided to the jury for attempted manslaughter by act, also known as attempted voluntary manslaughter, constituted fundamental error because it imposed an additional element of intent to kill.1 We agree.
This case is controlled by our decision in Betts v. State, — So.3d -, 2011 WL 6058312 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011). Both Weber and Betts were charged with attempted first-degree premeditated murder, and both were convicted of the category one lesser-included offense of attempted sec*974ond-degree murder with a weapon. Attempted manslaughter by act is also a category one lesser-included offense of attempted first-degree premeditated murder. Betts, — So.Sd at -; see also Fla. Std. Jury Instr. (Crim.) 6.2. In Betts, this court held that the standard attempted manslaughter by act instruction was fundamentally erroneous because it imposed an additional element of intent to kill. — So.3d at-.
Montgomery v. State, 70 So.3d 603 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009), approved, 39 So.3d 252 (Fla.2010), was the first case to hold that the then standard manslaughter by act instruction was fundamentally erroneous because it improperly contained an additional element of intent to kill. In Betts, the initial brief in the direct appeal was filed after the issuance of the First District’s opinion in Montgomery. This court therefore concluded that Betts’ appellate counsel was ineffective in failing to argue, based on the First District’s Montgomery decision, that the standard attempted manslaughter by act instruction was fundamentally erroneous. — So.3d at -.
Here, the initial brief in Weber’s direct appeal of his judgment and sentence also was filed subsequent to the issuance of the First District’s Montgomery decision.2 We therefore conclude that Weber’s appellate counsel was ineffective in failing to argue that the standard attempted manslaughter by act instruction was fundamentally erroneous.
Because a new appeal would be redundant in this case, we reverse Weber’s conviction for attempted second-degree murder, vacate the sentence, and remand for a new trial. See Betts, — So.3d at-. As we did in Betts, we certify conflict with Williams v. State, 40 So.3d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), review granted, 64 So.3d 1262 (Fla.2011).
Petition granted.
LaROSE and CRENSHAW, JJ„ Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Montgomery, 39 So. 3d 252 (Fla. 2010)
- Amos Augustus Williams v. State, 40 So. 3d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)
- Montgomery v. State, 70 So. 3d 603 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)
- Lamb v. State, 18 So. 3d 734 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)
- BIR v. State, 64 So. 3d 1262 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)
- Banek v. State, 75 So. 3d 762 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)