JAMEL LEE BELL, 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.
Jamel Lee Bell appealed his convictions for first-degree murder, attempted robbery with a firearm, and robbery. The appellate court affirmed the murder and robbery convictions but reversed the attempted robbery conviction due to insufficient evidence, finding that the premeditation theory of murder had adequate evidentiary support despite the felony murder theory's legal inadequacy.
The court affirmed Bell's convictions for robbery and first-degree murder but reversed the conviction for attempted robbery with a firearm due to insufficient evidence. Although the felony murder theory was legally inadequate due to insufficient evidence of the underlying attempted robbery, reversal of the murder conviction was not warranted because the evidence was sufficient to support the alternative premeditation theory.
[1] A conviction for first-degree murder based on a general verdict can be affirmed even if the evidence is insufficient to support one of the alternative theories of guilt,…
[2] A conviction for attempted robbery with a firearm will be reversed when the evidence presented is insufficient to establish a prima facie case of guilt for that offense.
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“reversal is not warranted where the general verdict could have rested upon a theory of liability without adequate evidentiary support when there was an alternative theory of guilt for which the evidence was sufficient”
Establishes the legal standard allowing affirmance of a conviction on an alternative theory even when one theory lacks evidentiary support
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBell was involved in two separate criminal incidents with different victims. In the first incident, Bell robbed a victim who survived and testified at…
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 Attempted Robbery With A Firearm cases and more on FLexlaw
Jamel Lee Bell appeals his convictions for first-degree murder, attempted robbery with a firearm, and robbery. We affirm Bell’s convictions for robbery and first-degree murder. We reverse Bell’s conviction for attempted robbery with a firearm, and we remand with directions.
This case involves two separate incidents and two different victims. In regard to the incident that led to Bell’s conviction for robbery, the victim survived and testified against Bell at trial. We affirm Bell’s conviction for robbery without further comment.
In regard to the incident that led to Bell’s conviction for first-degree murder, the State presented alternative theories of premeditation and felony murder. In this case, the latter theory required the State to establish, among other things, that Bell committed an attempted robbery with a firearm upon the victim who did not survive.
The evidence was insufficient to establish a prima facie case of guilt for attempted robbery with a firearm. Thus, we must reverse Bell’s conviction for attempted robbery with a firearm. Notwithstanding our reversal of the underlying felony, however, reversal of Bell’s conviction for first-degree murder is not warranted. The jury returned a general verdict of guilt for first-degree murder, and the evidence was sufficient to establish premeditation. Accordingly, we affirm Bell’s conviction for first-degree murder. See San Martin v. State, 717 So.2d 462, 470 (Fla.1998) (explaining that a general guilty verdict cannot be upheld if the conviction may have rested on an unconstitutional ground or a legally inadequate theory, but that “reversal is not warranted where the general verdict could have rested upon a theory of liability without adequate evidentiary support when there was an alternative theory of guilt for which the evidence was sufficient”); see also Davis v. State, 922 So.2d 438 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (affirming conviction based on premeditated murder theory).
Bell’s convictions for robbery and first-degree murder are affirmed. His conviction for attempted robbery with a firearm is reversed and the matter is remanded to the trial court with directions to vacate the judgment and sentence for this offense. Because Bell’s sentences for these offenses are being served concurrently, our reversal of the attempted robbery with a fire*211arm conviction will not affect Bell’s sentences and he need not be present for resentencing.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; and remanded with directions.
CASANUEVA, C.J., and KELLY, J., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jamel Lee Bell v. State, 270 So. 3d 1290 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019)…ay 22, 2019. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Donald G. Jacobsen, Judge. Jamel Lee Bell, pro se. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See McDonald v. State, 133 So. 3d 530 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013); Bell v. State, 27 So. 3d 209 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); Doby v. State, 25 So. 3d 598 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Hughes v. State, 22 So. 3d 132 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Valdez-Garcia v. State, 965 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007); Steward v. State, 931 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Shortridge v.…
Authorities Cited
- Martin v. State, 717 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 1998)
- Davis v. State, 922 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)