JOHNSON
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
When an appellant's counsel requests a jury instruction that is challenged on appeal, the instruction cannot constitute fundamental error because the error is invited.
[1] When an appellant's counsel has proposed a jury instruction that is later challenged on appeal, the instruction cannot constitute fundamental error because any error ther…
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 intelligence“When an appellant's counsel has requested the instruction challenged on appeal, that instruction cannot constitute fundamental error, because any error in the instruction was invited.”
The court's explanation for why the jury instruction challenge fails review despite no objection below
Johnson was convicted of manslaughter following a jury trial in Escambia County. He appealed, challenging the trial court's denial of his motion for j…
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 Invited Error Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Timothy Lavon Johnson appeals his conviction for manslaughter following a jury trial. He argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal and that it gave the jury erroneous instructions. We find that the trial court properly denied his motion without further comment and write only to address the second issue.
Johnson did not object to the jury instructions below, so we are confined to review his claim only for fundamental error. State v. Delva, 575 So. 2d 643, 644–45 (Fla. 1991). Because Johnson challenges jury instructions, which he proposed, we need not reach the merits. When an appellant’s counsel has requested the instruction challenged on appeal, that instruction cannot constitute fundamental error, because any error in the instruction was invited. Baptiste v. State, 324 So. 3d 453, 456 (Fla. 2021). We therefore affirm.
AFFIRMED.
OSTERHAUS, C.J., and M.K. THOMAS and LONG, JJ., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________
Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender, and Kasey Helms Lacey, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Miranda Lee Butson, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- D'Angelo v. State, 575 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 1991)
- Wileme Baptiste v. State, 382 So. 3d 22 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)