CARLOS DANTE REED
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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 trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motions for judgment of acquittal where sufficient evidence proved both the murder and its premeditation, and the burglary charge.
[1] Sufficient evidence supports a conviction for first-degree murder where the evidence establishes both that the defendant committed the murder and that the murder was prem…
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 intelligenceCarlos Dante Reed was indicted, tried, and convicted of first-degree murder with a firearm and burglary of a dwelling with an assault or battery and a…
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 First Degree Murder With A Firearm cases and more on FLexlaw
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
CARLOS DANTE REED,
Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D18-3831
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
________________________________/
Opinion filed November 15, 2019
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Marc L. Lubet, Judge.
James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Darnelle Paige Lawshe, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Douglas T. Squire, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Carlos Dante Reed, was indicted, tried, and convicted of first-degree murder with a firearm (Count One) and burglary of a dwelling with an assault or battery and a firearm (Count Two). He argues on appeal that the trial court erred in denying his motions for judgment of acquittal. We find no error in the trial court allowing the firstdegree murder charge to go to the jury, as there was sufficient evidence to prove both
2
that Appellant murdered the victim and that the murder was premeditated. See Ford v. State, 267 So. 3d 1070, 1075 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019). Nor did the trial court err in denying Appellant’s motion regarding Count Two. See In re M.E., 370 So. 2d 795, 797 (Fla. 1979).
AFFIRMED.
ORFINGER, EDWARDS, and HARRIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- In the Interest of M. E., 370 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 1979)
- Ford v. State, 267 So. 3d 1070 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)