ORETT KERR, 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.
Orett Kerr appeals his convictions for attempted first-degree murder of a law enforcement officer (convicted as lesser included offense of aggravated assault) and resisting an officer with violence. The court affirmed the aggravated assault conviction despite an information deficiency but reversed the resisting conviction due to erroneous jury instructions.
Although the information's failure to allege the well-founded fear element was a deficiency, convicting Kerr of aggravated assault (a lesser degree felony than the charged attempted first-degree murder) did not constitute fundamental error because the convicted offense carried lesser penalties than the charged offense. However, the jury instruction on the resisting an officer charge that the arrest was lawful execution of legal duty was error requiring reversal and a new trial on that count.
[1] A conviction for a lesser included offense does not constitute fundamental error when the improperly charged offense is lesser in degree and penalty than the main offense…
[2] A conviction for aggravated assault is not fundamental error when the information fails to allege a required element if the charged offense is of a higher degree and pena…
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“it is not fundamental error to convict a defendant under an erroneous lesser included charge when he had an opportunity to object to the charge and failed to do so if: 1) the improperly charged offense is lesser in degree and penalty than the main offense”
Establishes the legal standard for whether an erroneous lesser included offense charge constitutes fundamental error
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKerr was charged by information with attempted first-degree murder of a law enforcement officer. He was convicted of the lesser included offense of ag…
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 Lawful Execution Of A Legal Duty cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Orett Kerr appeals his convictions and sentences.
We affirm in part and reverse in part. Kerr was charged by information with, inter alia, one count of attempted first degree murder of a law enforcement officer. He was convicted on that count, however, of the lesser included offense of aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer.
On appeal, Kerr asserts that it was fundamental error for him to be convicted and sentenced for aggravated assault where the information failed to allege that the victim had a well-founded fear of imminent violence, a required element of aggravated assault. See §§ 784.011, .021, Fla. Stat. (2003).
Although defendant is correct as to the information’s deficiency, his conviction and sentence for aggravated assault do not constitute fundamental error because it is lesser in degree and penalty from the charged offense of attempted first degree murder of a law enforcement officer. See Ray v. State, 403 So. 2d 956, 961 (Fla.1981) (“it is not fundamental error to convict a defendant under an erroneous lesser included charge when he had an opportunity to object to the charge and failed to do so if: 1) the improperly charged offense is lesser in degree and penalty than the main offense.... ”).
In the instant case, the offense charged in the information (i.e., attempted first degree murder of a law enforcement officer) is a first degree felony. § 782.04(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2003). The offense for which Kerr was convicted and sentenced (i.e., aggravated assault) is a third degree felony, § 784.021(2), Fla. Stat. (2003), reclassified to a second degree felony because the victim is a law enforcement officer. § 784.07(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2003).
Moreover, the charged offense carried a greater penalty than the offense for which Kerr was convicted.
Hence, although the charge on the lesser included offense should not have been given to the jury, we cannot conclude that it was fundamental error to do so in this case. Ray; Sanders v. State, 912 So. 2d 1286 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005), review granted, 919 So. 2d 436 (Fla.2006); James v. State, 845 So. 2d 996 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003); Torrence v. State, 440 So. 2d 392 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983) (en banc).
Defendant’s second issue asserts that the court erred when, in instructing the jury on the resisting an officer with violence charge, it included an instruction that defendant’s detention and arrest was a lawful execution of a legal duty. As the State properly conceded at argument, this was error. See Perry v. State, 861 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). We therefore reverse this conviction and remand for a new trial on this count.
Appellant’s remaining point lacks merit.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- RAY v. State, 403 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 1981)
- Torrence v. State, 440 So. 2d 392 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)
- Sanders v. State, 912 So. 2d 1286 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- Dowite James v. State, 845 So. 2d 996 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)
- Perry v. State, 861 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)