CHARLES C. REEDER, 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.
The court reversed a second-degree murder conviction and remanded for a new trial because the standard jury instruction on justifiable use of deadly force was internally inconsistent and constituted fundamental error where it effectively negated the defendant's sole defense.
The standard jury instruction for justifiable use of deadly force was internally inconsistent and amounted to fundamental error where it effectively negated the defendant's sole defense.
[1] The standard jury instruction for justifiable use of deadly force is internally inconsistent and constitutes fundamental error requiring reversal where the instruction ef…
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 Reeder was convicted of second-degree murder. The trial court instructed the jury using the standard Florida jury instruction on justifiable…
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 Initial Aggressor cases and more on FLexlaw
We reverse Appellant’s conviction for second-degree murder and remand for a new trial based on Floyd v. State, 151 So.3d 452 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. granted, 168 So.3d 229 (Fla.2014), which held that the standard jury instruction for justifiable use of deadly force was internally inconsistent and amounted to fundamental error where, as here, the instruction effectively negated the defendant’s sole defense. But see Cruz v. State, 2015 WL 2393281, at *8 (Fla. 4th DCA May 20, 2015) (certifying conflict with Floyd because it was “incorrectly decided”); Wyche v. State, 170 So.3d 898, 905 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015) (stating that the standard jury instruction for justifiable use of deadly force “is an accurate statement of the law on the use of deadly force, and there is no conflict between any of the sections contained in Chapter 776 [Florida Statutes] or any conflict within [the instruction]”); Woodsmall v. State, 164 So.3d 696, 697 n. 2 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) (rejecting defendant’s argument that reversal of murder conviction was required based on Floyd and holding that “no error resulted from the [justifiable use of deadly force] instruction [s]inee there was a dispute over who the initial aggressor was at the time the victim ... was stabbed [and the defendant’s] duty to retreat was dependent upon the jury’s resolution of that dispute”) (citing Sims v. State, 140 So.3d 1000, 1003 n. 3 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)). We find no merit in the other issues raised by Appellant.
REVERSED and REMANDED for a new trial.
WOLF, WETHERELL, and MARSTILLER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Floyd v. State, 151 So. 3d 452 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
- Wyche v. State, 170 So. 3d 898 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)
- Sims v. State, 140 So. 3d 1000 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
- Brunson v. State, 164 So. 3d 696 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)
- Woodsmall v. State, 164 So. 3d 696 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015)