RAYMOND CARRIN, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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 Florida Supreme Court quashed a First District Court of Appeal decision that had reversed Raymond Carrin's aggravated assault conviction and directed entry of judgment for the lesser included offense of culpable negligence. The Court vacated this decision in light of its recent holding in State v. Sigler that section 924.34 is unconstitutional insofar as it permits appellate courts to direct entry of judgment for lesser-included offenses without all elements being found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
Section 924.34 is unconstitutional to the extent that it permits appellate courts to direct entry of judgment for a lesser-included offense when all elements of that offense have not been found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
[1] An appellate court cannot direct entry of judgment for a lesser-included offense if all elements of that offense have not been found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
[2] A statute allowing an appellate court to direct entry of judgment for a lesser-included offense is unconstitutional to the extent it permits such action without a jury fi…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Does the procedure prescribed in I.T. v. State deny defendants their federal constitutional rights to trial by jury and proof beyond a reasonable doubt?”
The certified question of great public importance that prompted Supreme Court review
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCarrin was convicted of aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer. The First District Court of Appeal found that while the evidence did not prov…
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 Appellate Review Of Criminal Convictions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We have for review Carrin v. State, 875 So. 2d 719, 721 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004), in which the First District Court of Appeal cited section 924.34, Florida Statutes (2001), as construed by I.T. v. State, 694 So. 2d 720 (Fla.1997), in holding that, “[b]e-cause the evidence does not prove the offense for which the appellant was found guilty but does establish the lesser offense of culpable negligence, we reverse the appellant’s conviction for aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer and remand this cause to the trial court with directions to enter judgment for culpable negligence.” In so holding, however, the First District Court certified the following question as one of great public importance: “Does the procedure prescribed in I.T. v. State deny defendants their federal constitutional rights to trial by jury and proof beyond a reasonable doubt?” Carrin, 875 So. 2d at 722. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We stayed proceedings in this case pending disposition of State v. Sigler, 967 So. 2d 835, 845 (Fla.2007), in which we discussed I.T. and other cases at length in ultimately holding section 924.34 unconstitutional “to the extent that it can be read to allow the appellate court to direct entry of judgment for a lesser-included offense when all of the elements of the lesser-included offense have not been found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.” We thereafter issued an order directing respondent to show cause why we should not exercise jurisdiction in this case, summarily quash the decision being reviewed, and remand for reconsideration in light of our decision in Sigler. Respondent has conceded that it cannot show such cause.
We accordingly grant the petition for review in the present case. The decision under review is quashed and this matter is remanded to the First District Court for reconsideration upon application of this Court’s decision in Sigler. It is so ordered.
LEWIS, C.J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Carrin v. State, 980 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)…PER CURIAM. Pursuant to the Florida Supreme Court’s mandate in Carrin v. State, 978 So. 2d 115 (Fla.2008), which quashed our opinion in Carrin v. State, 875 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004), we now issue this opinion reversing Appellant’s conviction for aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer and remanding for a new trial on the lesser…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Sigler, 967 So. 2d 835 (Fla. 2007)
- I.T. v. State, 694 So. 2d 720 (Fla. 1997)
- Carrin v. State, 875 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)