BRUCE CURTIS BRADNEY, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 appellate court affirmed a robbery conviction, holding that the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of aggravated assault because the charging information did not allege the use of a deadly weapon.
No, the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of aggravated assault because the information charging the appellant with robbery did not allege the use of a deadly weapon.
“The information charging the appellant with the crime of robbery did not allege use of a deadly weapon. Thus, the trial court was. not required to instruct the jury on aggravated assault.”
This quote explains the core legal reasoning for the court's decision.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBruce Curtis Bradney was found guilty by a jury of robbery after he and another man held up a lounge, with Bradney using a gun. He was charged with ro…
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 Robbery cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant seeks review of a judgment and sentence entered against him following a jury verdict finding him guilty of the crime of robbery.
The record reveals that the appellant and another man held up the bartender and several patrons in a lounge. The appellant used a gun to commit the holdup. He was subsequently charged with the crime of robbery, to which he entered a plea of not guilty, and the cause proceeded to a jury trial. At the conclusion of all the evidence, the trial court refused to give the appellant’s requested charge on the lesser included offense of aggravated assault.
The appellant contends that the trial court committed reversible error in refusing to charge the jury on the lesser included offense. We do not agree. The information charging the appellant with the crime of robbery did not allege use of a deadly weapon. Thus, the trial court was. not required to instruct the jury on aggravated assault. See: Lindsey v. State, 53 Fla. 56, 43 So. 87; Allison v. State, Fla.App.1964, 162 So.2d 922.
Therefore, the verdict, adjudication and sentence here under review is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bradney v. State, 197 So. 2d 299 (Fla. 1967)…ERVIN, Justice (dissenting) : We were petitioned to review the decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, in 185 So. 2d 726. The defendant (Petitioner here) was charged with, and found guilty by a jury of the crime of simple robbery. He was sentenced to serve a term of fifteen years. In affirming the trial court, the District Court stated the Petitioner used a gun in the…
Authorities Cited
- Pleas Lindsey v. State, 53 Fla. 56 (Fla. 1907)
- Allison v. State, 162 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)