THOMAS DAVID MCGOWAN, 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.
Thomas McGowan appeals his conviction for manslaughter arising from a homicide that occurred during an altercation outside a Jacksonville bar. The jury rejected his self-defense claim despite evidence regarding the pistol's trigger sensitivity, and the appellate court affirmed his conviction.
The appellate court held that the trial court's evidentiary rulings regarding trigger sensitivity were not reversible error, and the conviction for manslaughter must be affirmed because appellant failed to demonstrate reversible error.
[1] A jury's verdict rejecting a defendant's self-defense claim and accepting the state's version of events is entitled to deference on appeal.
[2] Evidence regarding the ease with which a firearm's trigger can be pulled is admissible in a homicide prosecution.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Appellant said it was self-defense. But the jury obviously believed that the altercation which ensued after appellant's arrival at the scene was precipitated by the latter's aggressiveness.”
Establishes that the jury rejected McGowan's self-defense claim and found he initiated the aggressive confrontation.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMcGowan and his girlfriend returned to Dell's Monsoon Lounge around 2 a.m., where McGowan observed his estranged wife embracing the victim, Frank Próc…
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 Manslaughter cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment of conviction for manslaughter for which he was sentenced to a term of six months to twenty years which was entered after a jury trial. The information on which the trial was had charged appellant with murder in the second degree.
The homicide occurred during the course of an altercation outside a saloon in Jacksonville about two o’clock in the morning. Appellant and his girlfriend had earlier visited several watering places and before calling it a night, they drove back to Dell’s Monsoon Lounge. As they pulled into the parking lot, appellant observed his estranged wife in an embrace with the victim, one Frank Próctor.
Appellant said it was self-defense. But the jury obviously believed that the altercation which ensued after appellant’s arrival at the scene was precipitated by the latter’s aggressiveness. Appellant had a .22 caliber pistol under the front seat of his car. The defense was that when Frank Proctor and two companions came at the appellant, he defended himself by striking decedent in the head with the pistol which accidentally went off. However, the State’s evidence presented a different version, including testimony that as one of the witnesses approached the scene after Proctor had been shot, appellant told him to stop, saying “I shot one and I’ll shoot another”. It is manifest from the verdict that the jury rejected the appellant’s version and accepted the State’s.
The points raised by appellant as grounds for reversal relate primarily to the correctness of the trial court’s rulings on the admissibility of evidence as to the ease with which the trigger on the pistol could be pulled and whether the pistol had a hair trigger so as to be easily discharged when jarred. We have examined the evidence in this regard and have considered appellant’s argumentation in support of these issues and find them substantially without merit.
Appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, it is incumbent upon us to affirm the judgment appealed. Burton v. State, 128 So.2d 765 (Fla.App.1961).
Affirmed.
CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and WIGGINTON, J., concur.