ROOSEVELT MONBESIR, 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 first-degree murder and domestic aggravated assault where defendant doused ex-girlfriend with gasoline and ignited it, finding sufficient evidence of premeditated intent to kill and harmless error in voice message testimony, but remanded to correct clerical error in judgment.
Conviction for attempted first-degree murder with a weapon and domestic aggravated assault was affirmed because evidence sufficiently proved premeditated intent to kill, and any error in admitting voice message testimony was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
[1] Judgment of conviction containing reference to 'deadly' weapon on attempted first-degree murder charge must be corrected where jury verdict found only that defendant 'act…
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 intelligenceAppellant attempted to kill his ex-girlfriend by dousing her with gasoline and igniting it. He challenged the sufficiency of evidence regarding premed…
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 Clerical Error In Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
We affirm appellant’s conviction for attempted first degree murder with a weapon, as well as domestic aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, for attempting to kill his ex-girlfriend by dousing her with gasoline and igniting it. Although appellant claims that the evidence was insufficient to prove a premeditated intent to kill, there was more than ample evidence of such an intent. And while it appears that appellant’s best evidence objection to testimony relating the contents of a voice message from appellant may have been properly denied based upon section 90.954(3), Florida Statutes (2013), even if error, the admission of the testimony was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
We remand, however, to delete the judgment of conviction’s reference to a “deadly” weapon on the attempted first degree murder charge, as it appears to be a clerical error. The jury verdict found appellant guilty of attempted first degree murder and that he did “actually carry, display, use, threaten to use, or attempt to use a weapon ” during the attempt, which finding was consistent with the charge in the information. Thus, the inclusion of “deadly” in the judgment for attempted murder convicted him of a crime of which the jury did not find him guilty. This correction makes no difference in appellant’s sentence.
Affirmed but remanded to correct judgment of conviction.
WARNER, GROSS and FORST, JJ., concur.