ROSA MAE MCKNIGHT, 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.
Rosa Mae McKnight was convicted of aggravated assault after shooting and killing her live-in partner Harvey Lee Beekton during a confrontation in which he threatened and rushed toward her. The appellate court reversed her conviction, finding the uncontroverted evidence legally established self-defense as a matter of law, requiring acquittal.
The court reversed McKnight's conviction, holding that the trial court erred in denying her motion for directed verdict of acquittal. The uncontroverted evidence clearly demonstrated that McKnight acted in self-defense, which legally justified the homicide and required acquittal as a matter of law.
[1] A motion for a directed verdict of acquittal should be granted where no legally sufficient evidence has been submitted on which a jury could find a verdict of guilty.
[2] A defendant moving for a directed verdict of acquittal admits all facts in evidence and every conclusion favorable to the State that can be reasonably inferred therefrom.
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“In order to justify a homicide on the ground of self-defense, the situation must be such as to induce a reasonably prudent person that danger was imminent and that there was a real necessity for the taking of life.”
Establishes the legal standard for self-defense justification in homicide cases
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMcKnight and Beekton had lived together for approximately six weeks. Beekton had a reputation for violence in the community. On the night in question,…
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 Directed Verdict Of Acquittal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Rosa Mae McKnight was charged by information with manslaughter, tried by jury and found guilty of aggravated assault. The trial court adjudicated her guilty of aggravated assault and sentenced her to five years in the state penitentiary.
The facts of the case are uncontroverted. The evidence presented by the defendant herself was corroborated by the testimony of eye witnesses to the incident, and was supported by the evidence provided by other witnesses. The pertinent facts as reflected in the record and briefly stated herein, are that the defendant, Rosa Mae McKnight, had been living together with the victim, Harvey Lee Beekton, in her home for about six weeks. Beekton, whose nickname was “Tarzan,” was a large strong man with a reputation in the community for violence.
On the night in question, Beekton went to a bar where the defendant was having a drink with a woman friend. He beat the defendant with his fists on and about her head, and threw her against the door of the bar. Later that evening, the defendant returned home and found Beekton there. He threatened to seriously beat her. She told Beekton not to “come up” on her, but he continued to approach her, uttering profanities. Defendant again told Beekton not to bother her, that he had already beaten her that night and that she did not want to be beaten again. He began running toward her, she told him to stay back but he kept homing. Defendant, scared and with no place to run, removed a pistol from her pocketbook and fired at Beekton, killing him.
The first question raised by the defendant on this appeal, is whether the trial court erred in denying the defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of all of the evidence where the evidence, as a matter of law, established that the defendant acted in self-defense, and where no evidence was presented in contravention of that theory.
As a general rule, when a defendant moves for a directed verdict of acquittal, he admits all facts in evidence adduced and every conclusion favorable to the State fairly and reasonably inferable therefrom; a motion for directed verdict of acquittal should be granted where it is apparent that no legally sufficient evidence has been submitted on which a jury could legally find a verdict of guilty. Brown v. State, 294 So. 2d 128 (Fla.3rd DCA 1974); Garmise v. State, 311 So. 2d 747, 749 (Fla.3rd DCA 1975). In our opinion, the court erred in failing to grant the motion for directed verdict of acquittal.
The theory of the defense at trial was that Rosa Mae McKnight acted in self-defense. In order to justify a homicide on the ground of self-defense, the situation must be such as to induce a reasonably prudent person that danger was imminent and that there was a real necessity for the taking of life. Darty v. State, 161 So. 2d 864, 872-873 (Fla.2nd DCA 1964); Gil v. State, 266 So. 2d 43 (Fla.3rd DCA 1972). One who seeks to excuse homicide on the ground of self-defense must show that the killing was necessary at the time and that he did all he reasonably could to avoid it. State v. Coles, 91 So. 2d 200 (Fla.1956). The uncontroverted evidence in the record of this case clearly demonstrates that defendant McKnight acted in self-defense. Therefore, we reverse the conviction and sentence.
In view of this holding, the remaining points on appeal need not be discussed.
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (15 total)
-
Emory Jack Brown, Jr. v. State, 454 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)…he first appeal, held that the record clearly established self-defense so that the motion for directed verdict of acquittal should have been granted, reversed the judgment of conviction and ordered the defendant be discharged. In McKnight v. State, 341 So. 2d 261 (Fla.3d DCA 1977) the victim, a strong man [*599] with a reputation for violence, who had lived with defendant, severely beat defendant in a bar earlier in the evening. When defendant returned home, she found the victim there, who again threatened t…
-
LaPOLLA v. State, 504 So. 2d 1353 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)…tion for judgment of acquittal, the appellate court must regard all facts introduced in evidence as admitted by the defendant, and must indulge every reasonable inference in favor of the state. Everett, 339 So. 2d at 706; see also McKnight v. State, 341 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). It is not necessary to prove that there was a formal agreement among the alleged conspirators if a conspiratorial agreement can be inferred from circumstantial evidence indicative of an overall plan. Beke, 423 So. 2d at 419 (citi…
-
Terry v. State, 467 So. 2d 761 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)…ted the voluntariness of appellant’s post-arrest statement. DELL, J., and GEIGER, DWIGHT L., Associate Judge, concur. . See Gurganus v. State, 451 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1984) (Florida follows the McNaughton test for insanity). . See McKnight v. State, 341 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977) (in order to justify a homicide on the ground of self defense, the situation must be such as to induce a reasonably prudent person that danger was imminent and that there was a real necessity for the taking of life); see also § 78…
Previewing 3 of 15 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Darty v. State, 161 So. 2d 864 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- Garmise v. State, 311 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
- State v. Ola Coles, 91 So. 2d 200 (Fla. 1956)
- GIL v. State, 266 So. 2d 43 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)
- Brown v. State, 294 So. 2d 128 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)