BARBARA JEAN DORTCH, 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 felony battery conviction because the trial court gave a confusing and misleading jury instruction on justifiable use of force that negated the defendant's self-defense theory, constituting fundamental error despite lack of objection.
A trial court's erroneous jury instruction on justifiable use of force that is confusing, misleading, and negates a defendant's self-defense theory constitutes fundamental error requiring reversal even without contemporaneous objection.
[1] A trial court's erroneous jury instruction on a defendant's theory of self-defense that is confusing, misleading, and negates the defendant's only defense constitutes fun…
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“where, as here, a trial judge gives an instruction that is an incorrect statement of the law and necessarily misleading to the jury, and the effect of that instruction is to negate the defendant's only defense, it is fundamental error and highly prejudicial to the defendant.”
Court citing Carter v. State to establish the standard for fundamental error in jury instructions that negate a defendant's defense.
Barbara Dortch was convicted of felony battery. At trial, self-defense was a disputed issue, but the jury instruction on justifiable use of force was …
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 Erroneous Jury Instruction cases and more on FLexlaw
KELLY, Judge.
Barbara Dortch appeals from her judgment and sentence for felony battery. She argues that the trial court erred in giving an erroneous jury instruction on the justifiable use of force, her theory of defense. She concedes that defense counsel did not object to the instruction, but argues that the error is fundamental. We agree and reverse.
A trial court “should not give instructions which are confusing, contradictory, or misleading.” Butler v. State, 493 So. 2d 451, 452 (Fla.1986); see also Gerds v. State, 64 So. 2d 915, 916 (Fla.1953) (noting that a defendant has a due process right to have the court correctly and intelligently instruct the jury). Here, the instruction on the justifiable use of force, as read to the jury, was confusing and misleading and effectively negated Dortch’s assertion of self-defense, a disputed issue at trial. See York v. State, 932 So. 2d 413, 416 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (holding that the giving of an erroneous jury instruction on the defendant’s theory of self-defense affected the validity of the trial). Although Dortch’s counsel did not object to the erroneous instruction, the error was fundamental. See Carter v. State, 469 So. 2d 194, 196 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985) (stating that “where, as here, a trial judge gives an instruction that is an incorrect statement of the law and necessarily misleading to the jury, and the effect of that instruction is to negate the defendant’s only defense, it is fundamental error and highly prejudicial to the defendant.”).
Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a new trial.
WHATLEY and SILBERMAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Butler v. State, 493 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 1986)
- Carter v. State, 469 So. 2d 194 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Gerds v. State, 64 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 1953)
- York v. State, 932 So. 2d 413 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)