EZEQUIEL REYES, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 2006-03-29
No. 3D05-14
Before GERSTEN, RAMIREZ, and SHEPHERD, JJ.
924 So. 2d 932 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2006) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

Ezequiel Reyes appealed his second-degree murder conviction, arguing the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury on the definitions of justifiable and excusable homicide. The court reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that such instructions are mandatory in all murder and manslaughter cases absent clear affirmative waiver by defense counsel.


Holding

The trial court erred in failing to provide the jury with instructions on justifiable and excusable homicide definitions. Because the record did not clearly establish that defense counsel affirmatively agreed to exclude these specific definitions (as opposed to other portions of the manslaughter instruction), no valid waiver existed, and the conviction must be reversed.


Headnotes

[1] In all murder and manslaughter cases, the court must instruct the jury on the definitions of justifiable and excusable homicide.

[2] Failure to instruct the jury on justifiable and excusable homicide constitutes fundamental error.

Previewing 2 of 5 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

Key Quotes

“In all murder and manslaughter cases, the court must instruct the jury as to the definitions of justifiable and excusable homicide.”

Establishes the mandatory nature of justifiable and excusable homicide instructions in homicide cases

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Reyes was convicted of second-degree murder. At trial, the court and defense counsel discussed excluding part of the manslaughter instruction, but the…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Ezequiel Reyes (“Reyes”), appeals the trial court’s judgment and sentence for second degree murder. Reyes contends that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the definitions for justifiable and excusable homicide. We reverse.

In all murder and manslaughter cases, the court must instruct the jury as to the definitions of justifiable and excusable homicide. Rojas v. State, 552 So. 2d 914 (Fla.1989); Kitchen v. State, 592 So. 2d 773 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). Failing to give these instructions is fundamental error. Miller v. State, 573 So. 2d 337 (Fla.1991). The one exception to this rule is where defense counsel affirmatively agreed to or requested the incomplete instruction. State v. Lucas, 645 So. 2d 425 (Fla.1994).

Here, the record indicates that defense counsel and the court discussed excluding part of the manslaughter instruction. However, it is not clear from the record what part of the manslaughter instruction defense counsel agreed that the court should exclude, i.e., the justifiable and excusable definitions, or the lesser included offenses. See Smith v. State, 773 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)(convietion reversed where counsel agreed that an instruction oh manslaughter would be omitted but there was no agreement that the definitions on justifiable and excusable homicide would not be. read); Hall v. State, 677 So. 2d 1353 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)(defendant’s request that court forgo instructing the jury on lesser included offenses cannot be construed as a specific waiver of the justifiable and excusable homicide instruction). Accordingly, because it is not clear from the record that defense counsel affirmatively agreed to exclude the definitions of excusable and justifiable homicide, we reverse and remand for a new trial.

Reversed and remanded.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Jimenez v. State, 994 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)
    …luded offenses “cannot be construed as a specific waiver of, or affirmative request to limit, the justifiable and excusable homicide instruction.” Hall v. State, 677 So. 2d 1353, 1355 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (citations omitted). See also Reyes v. State, 924 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); Richardson v. State, 818 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). For the stated reasons, we must reverse the judgment and remand the case for a new trial. We reject the defendant’s second point on appeal, claiming that the evidence was l…
  • Bradshaw v. State, 61 So. 3d 1266 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)
    …d the “fact that the defendant unsuccessfully tried to waive instructions on lesser offenses cannot be construed as a specific waiver of, or affirmative request to limit, the justifiable and excusable homicide instruction”); see also Reyes v. State, 924 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (reversing second degree murder conviction where it was not clear from the record that defense counsel affirmatively agreed to exclude portion of manslaughter instruction defining justifiable and excusable homicide); Beckham v. St…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw