J. Y., A JUVENILE, 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 court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for a new trial because the question of self-defense is a factual issue for the trier of fact, and there was competent substantial evidence to support the adjudication.
A 17-year-old was charged with assault with intent to commit murder after a fight ensued when beer cans were placed on his mother's car. The altercati…
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 Assault With Intent To Commit Murder cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, a 17-year-old child, was charged, in a petition for delinquency, with assault with intent to commit murder. He was tried in the juvenile court, adjudicated delinquent and sentenced to probation with the condition that he complete the Boys Town program.
This case stems from an incident which occurred when the victim who had been drinking beer with friends, placed two beer cans on the top of the appellant’s mother’s car as a joke in order to annoy her. The appellant arrived home, saw the cans, and an altercation ensued, resulting in fist-fighting and kicking. The fighting stopped and the appellant went into his house. When he came out a few minutes later, the fight resumed and the appellant stabbed the victim with a knife he obtained in the house, inflicting a serious wound.
In this appeal, the appellant contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for new trial where the evidence as a matter of law established self defense. We do not agree. The question of self defense is ordinarily one of fact to be determined by the trier of fact. Scholl v. State, 1927, 94 Fla. 1138, 115 So. 43; Turner v. State, Fla.App.1974, 298 So. 2d 559. The findings of the trier of fact are presumed correct, and the appellate court will not sit as a second trier of fact. Hoover v. State, Fla.App.1968, 212 So. 2d 95. In examining a record to determine if there is sufficient evidence to support the conclusion of the trier of fact, an appellate court need only find substantial, competent evidence to support the conclusion. Crum v. State, Fla.App.1965, 172 So. 2d 24, 25. The adjudication of delinquency having arrived in this court with a presumption of correctness, all inferences to be drawn from the evidence are to be in favor of the adjudication of delinquency. Crum v. State, supra. Our review of the record demonstrates that there was competent substantial evidence to support the adjudication of delinquency.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Holland v. State, 359 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)…-defense there]. In Turner v. State, 298 So. 2d 559, 560 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974), it was said: “It was the function of the jury to evaluate the appellant’s testimony and to decide whether or not to accept his evidence of self defense”. In J. Y. v. State, 332 So. 2d 643, 644 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), the court said: “The question of self-defense is ordinarily one of fact to be determined by the trier of fact". No reversible error having been shown, the judgment is affirmed.…
-
Mack v. State, 346 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)…use the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction for manslaughter in that she acted in self defense. The question of self defense is one of fact to be determined by the jury. Scholl v. State, 94 Fla. 1138, 115 So. 43 (1927); J. Y. v. State, 332 So. 2d 643 (Fla.3d DCA 1976). Upon examination of the record, we find that there is substantial competent evidence to support the verdict. Crum v. State, 172 So. 2d 24 (Fla.3d DCA 1965); J. Y. v. State, supra. No error is demonstrated on this point. Defendant…
-
Curington v. State, 704 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)…minent. And use of deadly force is only proper if retreat is not possible. Stewart v. State, 672 So. 2d 865 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). In this case, Curington presented sufficient evidence to create a jury issue as to each of these elements. J.Y. v. State, 332 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). Where evidence presented at trial supports an instruction on self-defense (use of deadly force as well as non-deadly force), it is error not to give it. Garramone v. State, 636 So. 2d 869 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Smith v. State, 424…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Crum v. State, 172 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- Tige Scholl v. State, 94 Fla. 1138 (Fla. 1927)
- Hoover v. State, 212 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)
- Turner v. State, 298 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)