WILLIE BANKS, 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.
Willie Banks appealed his manslaughter conviction, arguing the trial court erred in excluding testimony about the victim's violent reputation and in instructing the jury on flight. The appellate court reversed, holding that evidence of the deceased's violent character is admissible in self-defense cases without requiring the defendant to establish prior knowledge of that reputation when used to prove the victim's conduct at the time of the incident.
Evidence of a deceased's violent character and reputation is admissible when self-defense is asserted if there is an issue as to the conduct of the deceased or the reasonableness of the defendant's belief as to imminent danger. Prior knowledge of the victim's reputation is not necessary when the evidence is offered to prove the victim's actual conduct at the time of the incident, though it is required when offered to show the defendant's actions were based on the victim's reputation. The flight instruction was not erroneous.
[1] Evidence of a deceased's reputation for violence is admissible when self-defense is asserted and there is an issue regarding the deceased's conduct or the reasonableness…
[2] When a defendant seeks to prove that their actions were based on the deceased's reputation for violence, the defendant must establish prior knowledge of that reputation f…
Previewing 2 of 5 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“Evidence of a deceased's violent character is admissible when self defense is asserted if there is an issue as to either the conduct of the deceased or the reasonableness of the defendant's belief as to imminent danger from the deceased.”
Establishes the general rule for admissibility of victim character evidence in self-defense cases
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBanks admitted shooting Lawrence Bradley and Bradley's mother Beatrice but claimed self-defense, testifying that Bradley was pulling his gun to shoot …
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 Flight Instruction cases and more on FLexlaw
ANSTEAD, Judge.
This is an appeal from a judgment and conviction of manslaughter. The defendant was tried on a two count information for second degree murder involving the death of Lawrence Bradley and aggravated assault involving Beatrice Bradley, Lawrence’s mother. A verdict of not guilty was returned on the aggravated assault charge. The defendant appeals on the grounds that the trial court erred in refusing to allow testimony as to the deceased’s reputation for violence and in instructing the jury as to flight. We find no error with reference to the instruction on flight but reverse because of the exclusion of testimony as to reputation.
The defendant admitted shooting Bradley and his mother but claimed self defense. The defendant testified he shot the deceased because “. . .he was pulling his gun to shoot me.” The defendant called his wife and his sister-in-law as witnesses and attempted to have each testify as to the reputation of the deceased. The prosecutor objected each time on the ground that the defendant himself had not established he had prior knowledge of the deceased’s reputation. Each time the trial court ruled that such testimony was not admissible absent a showing of the defendant’s prior knowledge. At the close of the case the trial court did instruct the jury that the deceased’s character or reputation for violence might be considered if such fact was known to the defendant when the incident took place.
Evidence of a deceased’s violent character is admissible when self defense is asserted if there is an issue as to either the conduct of the deceased or the reasonableness of the defendant’s belief as to imminent danger from the deceased. Garner v. State, 28 Fla. 113, 9 So. 835 (1891); Fine v. State, 70 Fla. 412, 70 So. 379 (1915); Copeland v. State, 41 Fla. 320, 26 So. 319 (1899); Williams v. State, 252 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971). Both issues were present in this case. When the defendant seeks only to prove that his actions were based on the deceased’s reputation for violence it is necessary that the defendant establish prior knowledge of such reputation before evidence of reputation is admissible.
However, prior knowledge is not necessary in order to introduce reputation evidence on the issue of the deceased’s conduct at the time of the incident in question. Cole v. State, 193 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1st DCA 1967). Reputation testimony is one way to prove character and it is the decedent’s character that is actually sought to be proven by reputation testimony in order to shed light on his conduct at the time of the incident involved.
In this case where the defendant’s only defense was self defense we are unable to say that the failure to admit reputation evidence was harmless error. For this reason the judgment of conviction is reversed and this cause is remanded for a new trial.
ALDERMAN, C. J., and LETTS, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (18 total)
-
Smith v. State, 606 So. 2d 641 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…(reversing first-degree murder conviction, because defendant erroneously precluded from offering reputation and specific-act evidence relative to self-defense claim). See also Hager v. State, 439 So. 2d 996, 997 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Banks v. State, 351 So. 2d 1071, 1072 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 354 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 1977); Williams v. State, 252 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 255 So. 2d 682 (Fla.1971); §§ 90.404 & .405, Fla.Stat. (Supp.1990 & 1989); Charles W. Ehrhardt, Florida Evidence § 404.6…
-
Dupree v. State, 615 So. 2d 713 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…a v. State, 452 So. 2d 98, 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Hodge v. State, 315 So. 2d 507, 510 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Woodson v. State, 483 So. 2d 858, 859 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Pino v. [*721] Koelber, 389 So. 2d 1191, 1194 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); Banks v. State, 351 So. 2d 1071, 1072 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 354 So. 2d 986 (Fla.1977). Moreover, federal courts, in interpreting Federal Rule of Evidence 404, upon which section 90.404 is modeled, similarly allow the admission of character evidence only when the accused ha…
-
Williams v. State, 982 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)…nse.” Hedges v. State, 667 So. 2d 420, 422 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). To utilize this exception, “the defendant’s prior knowledge of the victim’s reputation is not necessary.” Smith v. State, 606 So. 2d 641, 643 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (citing Banks v. State, 351 So. 2d 1071, 1072 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)). Here, defense counsel attempted to elicit testimony from the defendant that he had seen the victim with a gun on two prior occasions and knew the victim had a reputation for carrying a gun. It is undisputed that the defe…
Previewing 3 of 18 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Garner v. State, 28 Fla. 113 (Fla. 1891)
- Fine v. State, 70 Fla. 412 (Fla. 1915)
- Noble Williams v. State, 252 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)
- Copeland v. State, 41 Fla. 320 (Fla. 1899)
- Cole v. State, 193 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966)