Bryant v. State
| Decision Date | 21 April 2006 |
| Docket Number | No. 2D05-3173.,2D05-3173. |
| Citation | 932 So.2d 408 |
| Parties | Larry Wayne BRYANT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Megan Olson, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Tonja Rene Vickers, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.
Larry Wayne Bryant appeals from his conviction for battery on a person sixty-five years of age or older. He alleges that the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of battery. We agree and reverse Mr. Bryant's conviction and remand for a new trial.
The facts of this case are not in dispute. On May 29, 2004, Mr. Bryant was involved in a series of altercations with a sixty-five-year-old woman while both parties were guests at a beach motel in Pinellas County. During the jury trial charge conference, defense counsel requested an instruction on the lesser-included offense of simple battery, but the trial court denied that request. Defense counsel posed no objection to the court's denial. Before the jury retired to deliberate, the court inquired whether either the State or the defense objected to the instructions as given, and defense counsel stated that he "re-urged" all the objections he had previously made. The jury found Mr. Bryant guilty of the charge of battery on a person sixty-five years of age or older, and Mr. Bryant was sentenced to 27.3 months' imprisonment. The issue on appeal is whether the trial court's failure to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of simple battery constitutes reversible error.
Battery is a category one lesser-included offense when the offense charged is battery on a person sixty-five years of age or older. Fla. Std. Jury Instr. (Crim.) 8.16 (1997). According to State v. Abreau, 363 So.2d 1063, 1064 (Fla.1978), failure to give a requested jury instruction on a necessarily lesser-included offense is per se reversible error. This principle is prefaced on the jury's right to exercise its "pardon power" and applies regardless of the degree of proof or record evidence supporting conviction for the greater offense. State v. Wimberly, 498 So.2d 929, 932 (Fla.1986). Therefore, regardless of the fact that the age of the victim was not in dispute in this case, the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury on simple battery.
The State argues that even if the trial court did err, such error was harmless because the jury had the opportunity to exercise its pardon power by acquitting Mr. Bryant. However, this court has specifically held that failure to instruct on a category one lesser-included offense is not subject to harmless error analysis. Boland v. State, 893 So.2d 683, 686 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (citing Wimberly, 498 So.2d at 932). This court has also noted that while it would prefer to be able to find such error harmless, Wimberly controls and therefore failure to instruct on a lesser-included offense mandates a reversal of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wong v. State
...give a requested jury instruction the trial court must have unequivocally denied the request for the instruction.See Bryant v. State, 932 So.2d 408, 410 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) ("[T]he objectives of [the contemporaneous objection] rule are satisfied ‘when the record shows clearly and unambiguous......
-
Wong v. State
...the request and just as clearly denied the request .’ " Wong , 184 So.3d at 1124 (alterations in original) (quoting Bryant v. State , 932 So.2d 408, 410 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) ). However, in application, the decision below departed from that standard by imposing a higher standard. Specifically,......
-
State v. Floyd
...satisfy the demands of the individual situation. See, e.g., Outlaw v. State, 82 Fla. 68, 89 So. 342, 343 (1921) ; Bryant v. State, 932 So.2d 408, 409–10 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) ; Gibbs v. State, 789 So.2d 443, 444–45 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001).Floyd's failure to object or raise concerns belies his cont......
-
Castro v. State
...one, necessarily lesser included offenses and the failure to do so constitutes reversible error per se. See, e.g., Bryant v. State, 932 So.2d 408 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Nelson v. State, 665 So.2d 382 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). We reject, however, Castro's claim that solicitation to commit second deg......
-
Crimes
...age of the victim is not in dispute. The failure to give a category 1 lesser is not subject to harmless error analysis. Bryant v. State, 932 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) When defendant is charged with BLEO by touching or striking the officer, the court fundamentally errs in instructing the......