THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
JULIAN C. ANDREU, EDWARD R. LECOMPTE, AND LETONA LECOMPTE, ALSO KNOWN AS TONI LECOMPTE, APPELLEES
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.
This case reviews the dismissal of a first-degree murder indictment based on the felony-murder rule. The court affirmed the dismissal, finding the rule inapplicable when a police officer accidentally kills another officer while attempting to apprehend a suspect during a burglary attempt.
No, the felony-murder rule is not applicable in this specific scenario. The court affirmed the trial court's dismissal of the indictment.
“The indictment is predicated upon the operation of the felony-murder rule as it involves the homicide of a police officer by the act of another officer occurring during the course of said officer's efforts to apprehend appellee while the latter and his companion attempted to burglarize a residence that had been "staked out" by the former.”
This quote describes the core factual and legal basis of the indictment being reviewed.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellees were attempting to burglarize a residence that had been "staked out" by police officers. During the attempted apprehension, one officer,…
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 Felony Murder cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant seeks review of an order entered by the trial court dismissing an indictment for murder in the first degree. The indictment is predicated upon the operation of the felony-murder rule as it involves the homicide of a police officer by the act of another officer occurring during the course of said officer’s efforts to apprehend appellee while the latter and his companion attempted to burglarize a residence that had been “staked out” by the former.
The facts agreed to indicate that neither the appellee nor his accomplice were known to be armed nor did they know of the presence of the officers within the residence. The record facts show that the homicide resulted from the deceased officer’s failure to adhere to the prearranged plan when he moved in the darkness in a forbidden direction intended to be “covered” by another officer. The latter, mistakenly believing the deceased to be one of the burglars, fired and mortally wounded his companion.
The trial court held in a well reasoned opinion that under the facts peculiar to the case at bar, the felony-murder rule was inapplicable.
Our consideration of the record, briefs, and oral arguments of the parties has failed to demonstrate that the order now under review is erroneous, and it is therefore
Affirmed.
RAWLS, Acting C. J., and JOHNSON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Whiley v. Hon. Rick Scott, 79 So. 3d 702 (Fla. 2011)…to call a second special session). As a general rule, unless there is a compelling reason for invoking the original jurisdiction of a higher court, a quo warranto proceeding should be commenced in circuit court. See State ex rel. Vance v. Wellman, 222 So. 2d 449, 449 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969). This Court may choose to consider extraordinary writ petitions “where the functions of government would be adversely affected absent an immediate determination by this Court.” Chiles, 714 So. 2d at 457; see, e.g., Allen v. B…
-
State v. Williams, 254 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971)…ouble jeopardy. . See, Hornbeck v. State (Fla.1955), 77 So. 2d 876 (officer shot by either robber or fellow officer) ; and Griffith v. State (Fla.App.1965), 171 So. 2d 597 (bystander shot by robbery victim). But see, State v. Andreu (Fla.App.1969), 222 So. 2d 449. . (1955), 381 Pa. 500, 113 A. 2d 464. . (1958), 391 Pa. 550, 138 A. 2d 447. . Commonwealth ex rel. Smith v. Myers (1970), 438 Pa. 218, 261 A. 2d 550, 556. . We think it not inappropriate at this juncture, to point out that Pennsylvania has pres…
-
Wright v. State, 344 So. 2d 1334 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)…out the ambit of the statute, i. e., no innocent party killed. Wil [*1337] liams, supra. With regard to category three Hornbeck, supra, suggested that the felony-murder rule would be applicable to that factual situation. However, in State v. Andreu, 222 So. 2d 449 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969) our sister court held the felony-murder rule inapplicable where one police officer was killed by a second officer, the latter trying to apprehend the defendant. Looking to the factual circumstances in the case sub judice, which…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence