D.K.T., A JUVENILE
v.
THE 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.
D.K.T., a juvenile, appealed a conviction, raising a self-defense claim under Florida's use-of-force statute. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, holding that the trial court properly submitted the self-defense question to the jury and that substantial competent evidence supported the verdict.
The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the trial court properly denied the motion for judgment of dismissal and that substantial competent evidence supported the jury's determination that the use of force was not justified under the circumstances.
[1] Whether use of force is justified under Florida law, and the extent of force justified, is a question of fact for the trier of fact to determine based on whether the defe…
[2] Appellate courts review de novo a trial court's denial of a motion for judgment of dismissal based on self-defense but view the evidence in a light most favorable to the…
Previewing 2 of 2 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“A person is justified in using or threatening to use force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other's imminent use of unlawful force.”
Statement of the self-defense justification standard under Florida law that governs the case.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe opinion does not detail the underlying facts of the incident. The case involves a juvenile defendant (D.K.T.) who was convicted of an offense and …
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 Justification For Use Of Force cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed October 30, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D24-1208 Lower Tribunal No. J23-1328A
________________
D.K.T., a juvenile,
Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Dawn Denaro, Judge. Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Susan S. Lerner, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Daniel Colmenares, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before EMAS, FERNANDEZ and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See § 776.012(1), Fla. Stat. (2023) (providing in pertinent part: “A person is justified in using or threatening to use force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other's imminent use of unlawful force.”) (emphasis added); K.S.H. v. State, 56 So. 3d 122, 124 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (“We review de novo the trial court's decision denying the motion for judgment of dismissal, but we view the evidence, and all reasonable inferences from the evidence, in a light most favorable to the State (as the prevailing party), to determine whether there is substantial, competent evidence to support the factfinder's determination.”) (citation omitted). See also id. at 124-25 (“Ordinarily, whether the use of force (and whether the amount of force used) was justified is a question to be determined by the trier of fact. . . . Thus the trier of fact must necessarily determine whether the use of any force was justified under the circumstances, and, if so, whether the amount of force used was justified under the circumstances.”) (citations omitted); Lambrix v.
State, 39 So. 3d 260, 269 (Fla. 2010) (“Appellate courts do not ‘reweigh the evidence or second-guess the circuit court's findings as to the credibility of witnesses.’”) (quoting Nixon v. State, 2 So. 3d 137, 141 (Fla. 2009)) (additional quotation omitted).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Nixon v. State, 2 So. 3d 137 (Fla. 2009)
- Cary Michael Lambrix v. State, 39 So. 3d 260 (Fla. 2010)
- K.S.H. v. State, 56 So. 3d 122 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)