JAMES ROBERT WATERS, 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.
James Robert Waters appealed his convictions for manslaughter and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, challenging jury instructions on self-defense under Florida's Stand Your Ground law. The appellate court affirmed, holding that Waters waived his fundamental error claims by requesting the instructions himself and incorporating them into his closing argument, and alternatively finding that any instructional error did not render his trial fundamentally unfair.
Waters waived his fundamental error claims by affirmatively requesting the instructions he now challenges and incorporating them into his closing argument. Alternatively, even if error occurred, it did not vitiate the trial because the instructions did not preclude the jury from finding that Waters' use of deadly force was justifiable based on his theory that retreat was futile and he faced imminent danger of death or great bodily harm.
[1] A defendant waives a claim of fundamental error in jury instructions by affirmatively requesting the instruction that is later challenged.
[2] A defendant waives a claim of fundamental error in jury instructions by incorporating those instructions into closing arguments.
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“Fundamental error may be waived where defense counsel requests an erroneous instruction”
Establishes that a defendant cannot claim fundamental error in jury instructions if the defendant affirmatively requested those instructions.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWaters was convicted of manslaughter and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. His defense at trial was that he used deadly force because the …
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 Fundamental Error In Jury Instructions cases and more on FLexlaw
James Robert Waters appeals his convictions and sentences for manslaughter and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Under both points raised on appeal, Waters urges fundamental error occurred in the giving of select standard jury instructions bearing on his claim of self-defense as provided in section 776.013(3), Florida Statutes (2012), Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law. Any claim *435of fundamental error in the giving of jury instructions, however, can be waived “[b]y [the defendant’s] affirmatively requesting the instruction he now challenges!.]” Armstrong v. State, 579 So.2d 734, 735 (Fla.1991) (“Fundamental error may be waived where defense counsel requests an erroneous instruction!.]”); see also Joyner v. State, 41 So.3d 306, 307 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (holding defendant could not claim fundamental error under State v. Montgomery, 39 So.3d 252 (Fla.2010), “because the defense not only failed to object to the standard jury instruction on manslaughter, he specifically agreed to that instruction at the charging conference and incorporated the instruction into his closing argument to the jury”). Here we find the record establishes that Waters waived both claims of fundamental error by unequivocally requesting the instructions he now challenges, and by incorporating those instructions in his closing argument.
Alternatively, we conclude that any error the trial court may have committed in giving either of the challenged instructions did not vitiate Waters’ trial by negating his only theory of defense, thereby rendering his trial fundamentally unfair. Waters’ defense was not that he had no duty to retreat, but that the victim had thwarted his every effort to flee the escalating violence, leaving him no option but to use deadly force because the force asserted against him by the victim “was so great that he reasonably believed he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm.” In this regard, the instructions as given would not have precluded the jury from finding, under the evidence presented, that Waters’ use of deadly force was justifiable, had it believed retreat was futile and Waters “was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm.” Cf. Garrett v. State, 148 So.3d 466, 471 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (“Despite the improper instruction, we do not conclude that the error reached down into the validity of the trial so as to render Garrett’s trial fundamentally unfair. When the entirety of the jury instructions relating to Garrett’s claim of self-defense are considered, the jury was not precluded from considering Garrett’s affirmative defense, regardless of his unlawful activity.”). See also, Pean v. State, 154 So.3d 1171, 1171 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (affirming and citing Garrett).
AFFIRMED.
RAY and MAKAR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Waters v. State, 267 So. 3d 538 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)…ellant argued the trial court’s conflicting jury instructions amounted to fundamental error. This Court affirmed, finding the appellant had waived both claims of fundamental error by requesting the instructions he was challenging. Waters v. State, 174 So. 3d 434, 435 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (Waters I). In the alternative, this Court concluded that any error in the instructions did not negate the appellant’s only theory of defense because his defense “was not that he had no duty to retreat, but that the victim…
-
Antoine Dourice Sirmones v. State, 204 So. 3d 968 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)…PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. Waters v. State, 174 So. 3d 434 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (citing to Armstrong v. State, 579 So. 2d 734, 735 (Fla. 1991) (holding that fundamental error can be waived when defense counsel requests an erroneous jury instruction)). LEWIS and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur. WOLF, J., dissents.…
-
Waters v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr. (Duval County) (M.D. Fla. 2024)…134-35. The trial court sentenced Waters on September 16, 2013. Id. at 139-43. Waters appealed, and on July 8, 2015, the First District Court of Appeal (First DCA) affirmed Waters' convictions and sentences in a written opinion, see Waters v. State, 174 So.3d 434 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). See Doc. 5-9 at 4-6. The First DCA issued the mandate on October 8, 2015. Id. at 3. Waters subsequently sought to invoke the discretionary jurisdiction of the Florida Supreme Court. See Doc. 5-10. On September 13, 2016, the Flo…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Montgomery, 39 So. 3d 252 (Fla. 2010)
- Armstrong v. State, 579 So. 2d 734 (Fla. 1991)
- Joyner v. State, 41 So. 3d 306 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)
- Garrett v. State, 148 So. 3d 466 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
- Pean v. State, 154 So. 3d 1171 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)
- Livingston v. State, 154 So. 3d 1171 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)