EDDIE FREEMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. | 1979-11-01
No. 54064
ENGLAND, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, OVERTON, SUNDBERG and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur.
377 So. 2d 1152 Florida Supreme Court (1979)

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.

Synopsis

Eddie Freeman appeals his first-degree murder conviction and death sentence, challenging the constitutionality of Florida's bifurcated insanity trial procedure. The Florida Supreme Court vacates and remands based on its recent decision in State ex rel. Boyd v. Green holding the bifurcated insanity statute unconstitutional.


Holding

Freeman is entitled to a new trial because he timely objected to the bifurcated insanity procedure at the trial court level, and the Court's subsequent decision in Boyd established that procedure to be unconstitutional.


Headnotes

[1] A statute providing for a bifurcated insanity trial procedure is unconstitutional.

[2] A defendant who timely objects to an unconstitutional bifurcated insanity trial procedure is entitled to a new trial.

Previewing 2 of 4 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

Key Quotes

“Within three weeks of the verdict in this cause, this Court, in State ex rel. Boyd v. Green, 355 So. 2d 789 (Fla.1978), held this bifurcated insanity statute to be unconstitutional.”

Establishes that the Court declared the statute unconstitutional shortly after Freeman's conviction, forming the basis for his new trial motion.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Eddie Freeman was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death following a trial conducted under Florida's bifurcated insanity trial proced…

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.

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This is a direct appeal from a conviction for murder in the first degree and imposition of the death sentence. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla.Const. Defendant, Eddie Freeman, challenged by a pretrial motion for declaratory judgment the constitutionality of the bifurcated insanity trial procedure as set forth in section 918.017(1), Florida Statutes (1977). The trial court ruled this statute constitutional and proceeded with the trial under the bifurcated format. Within three weeks of the verdict in this cause, this Court, in State ex rel. Boyd v. Green, 355 So. 2d 789 (Fla.1978), held this bifurcated insanity statute to be unconstitutional. Thereafter, the defendant timely filed a motion for a new trial on the basis of the Boyd decision, but the trial court denied said motion.

In Ashcraft v. State, 367 So. 2d 630 (Fla.1979), the defendant made an oral motion immediately prior to trial which challenged the constitutionality of section 918.017(1), Florida Statutes (1977). The trial court denied the motion and proceeded with the trial under the bifurcated format. On the basis of our decision in Boyd, we held that the defendant who had timely objected to this bifurcated procedure was entitled to a new trial.

In accordance with Boyd and Ashcraft, we find we must vacate defendant’s conviction and sentence and remand to the trial court which shall proceed with a new trial in which the death penalty may be imposed.

It is so ordered.

ENGLAND, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, OVERTON, SUNDBERG and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw