JOHN EDWARD HERMAN, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed a second-degree murder conviction because the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offenses of manslaughter and aggravated assault.
A trial court must charge the jury on lesser included offenses and lesser degrees of homicide even when the defendant asserts a self-defense claim.
[1] A trial court must instruct the jury on lesser included offenses and lesser degrees of homicide pursuant to Rule 3.490, FRCrP, even when the defendant asserts a self-defe…
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“The fact that a defendant may assert a claim of self-defense does not mitigate the operation of Rule 3.490 or dispense with the duty of the court to charge the jury on all lesser degrees and necessarily included offenses.”
Court explaining that self-defense claims do not eliminate the mandatory duty to instruct on lesser included offenses.
Herman was convicted of second-degree murder and appealed, arguing the trial court should have instructed the jury on manslaughter and aggravated assa…
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 Aggravated Assault cases and more on FLexlaw
In his appeal from a conviction of second degree murder the defendant assigns as error the refusal of the trial court to charge the jury upon the offense of manslaughter as a lesser degree of homicide and upon the offense of aggravated assault as a lesser included offense as requested by the defendant.
Based upon the clear language of Rule 3.490, FRCrP, 33 F.S.A. (former Section 919.14, F.S.), the recent decisions interpreting crimes divisible into degrees and necessarily included offenses, and the instant facts, we are of the opinion that *265the trial court erred in failing to charge on the offenses of manslaughter and aggravated assault. Brown v. State, Fla.1968, 206 So.2d 377; Appell v. State, Fla.App. 1971, 250 So.2d 318; see also State v. Washington, Fla.1972, 268 So.2d 901; Rayner v. State, Fla. 1973, 273 So.2d 759. The fact that a defendant may assert a claim of self-defense does not mitigate the operation of Rule 3.490 or dispense with the duty of the court to charge the jury on all lesser degrees and necessarily included offenses. Cf. Robles v. State, Fla.1968, 210 So.2d 441.
Accordingly, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial consistent with the views expressed herein.
Reversed and Remanded.
CROSS, OWEN and MAGER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Brown v. State, 206 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 1968)
- State v. Washington, 268 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 1972)
- Rayner v. State, 273 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 1973)
- Appell v. State, 250 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)
- Robles v. State, 210 So. 2d 441 (Fla. 1968)