Lesser Included Offense

3,833 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• Hanna v. State
  319 So. 2d 586· Fla. 1st DCA· 1975-07-21 ·cited 2×
• United States v. Carroll Blackwell
  515 F.2d 125· 4th Cir.· 1975-04-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a defendant can be tried and convicted of a lesser included offense, even if the principal pleaded guilty to that lesser offense.
• Thompson v. State
  310 So. 2d 448· Fla. 1st DCA· 1975-04-09 ·cited 2×
  Ronald Lee Thompson was convicted of breaking and entering two separate medical offices with intent to commit petit larceny. The appellate court affirmed the convictions, holding that the physical separation of the offices (each with distinct entrances, addresses, and limited acc
• United States v. Hartle M. Bowness
  504 F.2d 391· 5th Cir.· 1974-11-18 ·cited 2×
  The Supreme Court clarified that 'willfully' has the same meaning in tax felony and misdemeanor statutes, connoting a voluntary, intentional violation of a known legal duty.
• Benson v. State
  301 So. 2d 503· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-09-30 ·cited 2×
  Defendant convicted of two counts describing essentially the same conduct (breaking and entering with intent to commit rape while armed, and assault with intent to commit rape) cannot be punished cumulatively for the same criminal episode; sentences vacated and remanded for re-se
• Gerrold D. Davis v. State
  295 So. 2d 124· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-05-22 ·cited 2×
• United States v. Inge
  494 F.2d 1102· D.C. Cir.· 1974-03-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for armed robbery, but the conviction for assault with a dangerous weapon was vacated as a lesser included offense.
• Coates v. State
  288 So. 2d 572· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-01-18 ·cited 2×
  Johnny Lee Coates was convicted by jury of aggravated battery (lesser included offense of robbery), grand larceny, and use of a firearm in commission of a felony. On appeal, the court affirmed the convictions but vacated the sentences for aggravated battery, finding that the fire
• Terrell v. State
  282 So. 2d 34· Fla. 2d DCA· 1973-09-05 ·cited 2×
  Terrell was convicted of aggravated assault and appealed an order withholding adjudication and placing him on probation. The appellate court affirmed, rejecting Terrell's due process challenge to the denial of a hearing on photographic identification and his argument that the jur
• United States v. Alston
  483 F.2d 1264· D.C. Cir.· 1973-07-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant had no constitutional right to counsel at a pre-arrest photographic identification and that the mention of his arrest record was not reversible error.
• State v. Rodriguez
  276 So. 2d 5· Fla.· 1973-04-11 ·cited 2×
  Florida Supreme Court quashed the District Court of Appeal's reversal of a lottery conviction, holding that a trial court need not instruct on a lesser-included offense of possession of lottery paraphernalia when the defendant is charged with aiding or assisting in running a lott
• Bradley v. Beto
  473 F.2d 1039· 5th Cir.· 1973-02-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and unconstitutional sentence enhancement were without merit.
• Branam v. State
  265 So. 2d 555· Fla. 2d DCA· 1972-08-04 ·cited 2×
  Steven Branam was convicted of armed robbery after taking $72 from a store employee at gunpoint and sentenced to 75 years. On appeal, he challenged the admission of photographic identification evidence and the trial court's failure to charge the jury on the lesser included offens
• Martin v. State
  260 So. 2d 896· Fla. 2d DCA· 1972-04-05 ·cited 2×
  Martin was acquitted of robbery after the jury found insufficient evidence of his identity, then charged with conspiracy to commit the same robbery. The court reversed, holding that collateral estoppel, as applied in Ashe v. Swenson, prevents the state from prosecuting Martin for
• United States v. Roberto L. L. DE LA Garza
  462 F.2d 304· D.C. Cir.· 1972-04-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the exclusion of expert testimony regarding the 'Mexican revenge' custom was proper, as it was not relevant to the defendant's intent and the defendants were permitted to testify about their understanding of the custom.
• United States v. McCRAE
  459 F.2d 1140· D.C. Cir.· 1972-02-18 ·cited 2×
  The trial judge did not err in denying the appellant's motion for a judgment of acquittal, as the evidence presented was sufficient for a reasonable jury to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Enos
  453 F.2d 342· 9th Cir.· 1972-01-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of simple assault, as the evidence did not support such a finding.
• Jones v. State
  256 So. 2d 46· Fla. 3d DCA· 1971-12-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to charge the jury on simple assault as a lesser included offense and in sustaining an objection to a hearsay question.
• Carter v. State
  253 So. 2d 731· Fla. 1st DCA· 1971-10-05 ·cited 2×
  Florida appellate court affirmed denial of motion to vacate guilty plea to manslaughter, holding that the defendant's plea was knowing and voluntary based on the trial court colloquy.
• Clark v. State
  239 So. 2d 500· Fla. 2d DCA· 1970-09-16 ·cited 2×
• United States v. Cabbell
  427 F.2d 147· 4th Cir.· 1970-06-10 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding no reversible error in the sufficiency of evidence, jury instructions, or failure to instruct on a lesser included offense.
• Smith v. State
  233 So. 2d 870· Fla. 4th DCA· 1970-03-18 ·cited 2×
  Petitioner was charged with conspiracy to commit first degree murder but convicted of conspiracy to commit assault and battery. The court granted certiorari and reversed, holding that assault and battery is not a necessarily included offense in conspiracy to commit first degree m
• United States v. Romeo Luan Arreola
  422 F.2d 869· 10th Cir.· 1970-03-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that failure to instruct on a lesser included offense is not plain error when the evidence only supports the greater offense.
• Ada Louise Dames v. State
  222 So. 2d 52· Fla. 3d DCA· 1969-04-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the jury verdict of manslaughter was supported by substantial competent evidence and that the trial court did not commit reversible error in its jury charges.
• Pinkney v. State
  219 So. 2d 42· Fla. 2d DCA· 1969-02-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a claim regarding jury instructions cannot be raised in a motion to vacate judgment and sentence.
• Darden v. State
  218 So. 2d 485· Fla. 2d DCA· 1969-02-07 ·cited 2×
  Willie Darden appeals his jury conviction for assault with intent to commit rape. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, rejecting arguments that the jury should have been instructed on a lesser misdemeanor offense and that the evidence was insufficient.
• Thompson v. State
  207 So. 2d 692· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-03-05 ·cited 2×
  Ernest Thompson was convicted of breaking and entering with intent to commit grand larceny in two separate incidents. The appellate court reversed in part, finding insufficient evidence of intent to commit grand larceny but affirming the lesser included offense of breaking and en
• Sprinkle v. State
  203 So. 2d 48· Fla. 1st DCA· 1967-10-12 ·cited 2×
  This case involves an appeal from a robbery conviction where the appellant argued the trial judge erred by not instructing the jury on the lesser included offense of larceny. The appellate court reversed the conviction, following a Florida Supreme Court ruling that such instructi
• Kraai v. State
  200 So. 2d 267· Fla. 1st DCA· 1967-06-22 ·cited 2×
  Appellant Kraai was convicted of assault with intent to commit robbery after a jury trial, despite being charged with robbery. He appealed contending the court erred in denying his motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and in instructing the jury on the robbery charge.
• Johnson v. State
  193 So. 2d 56· Fla. 3d DCA· 1966-12-27 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Supreme Court recalled its previous mandate and amended its prior judgment to affirm a conviction in full. The court had previously reversed part of the conviction, but upon learning the trial court had already corrected the error, it modified its own decision.
• Morrow v. State
  185 So. 2d 200· Fla. 3d DCA· 1966-04-19 ·cited 2×
  Gary Eugene Morrow appealed his convictions for uttering a forged instrument, breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony, and petit larceny. The appellate court affirmed the forgery conviction and the breaking and entering conviction, but reduced the breaking and enteri
• Johnson v. United States
  350 F.2d 784· D.C. Cir.· 1965-09-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a conviction for a lesser included offense is permissible even if not explicitly indicted, and that claims not raised below cannot be considered on appeal.
• Black v. State
  173 So. 2d 166· Fla. 2d DCA· 1965-03-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the conviction for assault with intent to commit manslaughter could not stand because the information did not allege the requisite intent to kill, which is the gravamen of the offense.
• Hilmer Burdette Sandine v. State
  172 So. 2d 634· Fla. 3d DCA· 1965-03-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial judge correctly admitted evidence tending to prove the defendant used different names and that the evidence supported the grand larceny conviction.
• Prather v. United States
  338 F.2d 551· D.C. Cir.· 1964-10-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that it has jurisdiction to entertain direct appeals from the convictions under the specific circumstances presented.
• United States ex rel. John M. Rafanello v. Hegstrom
  336 F.2d 364· 2d Cir.· 1964-08-19 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the denial of the writ of habeas corpus, holding that the relator was not prejudiced by any alleged variance between the charge of pool selling and the evidence of taking bets.
• Touhy v. COX
  145 F.2d 107· 8th Cir.· 1944-10-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the offenses of robbing mail custodians and stealing mail from pouches are distinct statutory crimes, and convictions for both are permissible.
• French v. State
  96 Fla. 657· Fla.· 1928-12-04 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction, holding that a jury verdict finding a defendant guilty of assault and attempt to murder sufficiently responded to a charge of assault with premeditated design to kill and murder.
• Green v. State
  279 So. 3d 85· Fla. 1st DCA· 2023-11-01 ·cited 1×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of Ronald Green's motion for postconviction relief. Green argued his counsel was ineffective for various reasons, including failing to object to an amended information, not requesting lesser included offense instructions, not
• Carver v. State
  300 So. 3d 1243· Fla. 5th DCA· 2022-10-03 ·cited 1×
  A trial court's decision stands where precedent establishes the applicable law regarding jury instructions in homicide prosecutions.
• Bailey v. State
  235 So. 3d 335· Fla. 3d DCA· 2020-10-14 ·cited 1×
• Menard v. Florida Attorney General (Collier County)
  2020 WL 2188675· M.D. Fla.· 2020-05-20 ·cited 1×
  James Matthew Menard, a Florida prisoner convicted of aggravated battery, armed trespass, and third-degree felony murder, sought federal habeas relief challenging his convictions and sentences on multiple grounds, including claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and sentenci
• McCrae v. State
  Fla. 1st DCA· 2019-07-09 ·cited 1×
  Louis Anthony McCrae appeals the denial of a habeas petition challenging his 2004 second-degree murder conviction, alleging the trial court caused manifest injustice by denying his prior postconviction challenge eight years earlier. The petition was treated as a motion for postco
• Lee v. State
  272 So. 3d 1232· Fla. 1st DCA· 2019-05-16 ·cited 1×
  Michael Jerome Lee appeals his conviction for aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer, claiming his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to request a jury instruction on reckless driving as a lesser included offense. The court affirmed the conviction, finding that Le
• Carr v. State
  270 So. 3d 508· Fla. 1st DCA· 2019-05-02 ·cited 1×
  Lauren Carr was convicted of organized fraud and sentenced to twelve years in prison for defrauding homeowners' associations through her company. On appeal, Carr challenged the trial court's refusal to give a good-faith jury instruction and its decision to give a willful-blindnes
• Mitchell v. State
  274 So. 3d 1136· Fla. 5th DCA· 2019-04-18 ·cited 1×
  Verdicts finding a defendant guilty of robbery with a firearm or deadly weapon and finding the defendant did not possess an actual firearm are not truly inconsistent when the defendant threatened the victim with a firearm-looking weapon used in a manner likely to produce death or
• Wykretowicz v. State
  264 So. 3d 389· Fla. 5th DCA· 2019-02-22 ·cited 1×
  Florida appellate court affirmed conviction for culpable negligence but noted in concurrence that the trial court improperly withheld adjudication while imposing jail time, though the issue was not preserved for review because the State did not challenge the sentence.
• Bradshaw v. State
  263 So. 3d 1139· Fla. 1st DCA· 2019-02-18 ·cited 1×
  Glen Alan Bradshaw was convicted of both dealing in stolen property and petit theft involving the same sawblades. The court held that Florida Statute section 812.025 prohibits dual convictions for theft and dealing in stolen property arising from a single scheme or course of cond
• McDonald v. State
  264 So. 3d 202· Fla. 4th DCA· 2019-02-13 ·cited 1×
  Calvin McDonald appeals his convictions for robbery with a deadly weapon and attempted robbery with a deadly weapon. The court reversed because McDonald was convicted of crimes he was not charged with, violating due process, and remanded for conviction reduction to robbery and at
• In re STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIM. CASES-REPORT 2018-06.
  260 So. 3d 941· Fla.· 2018-12-20 ·cited 1×
  The Florida Supreme Court approved proposed amendments to standard criminal jury instructions for robbery, carjacking, home-invasion robbery, and money laundering. The amendments improve readability, track statutory language more closely, add important legal clarifications, and a