Bunn v. State, 77-811
| Decision Date | 19 September 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 77-811,77-811 |
| Citation | 363 So.2d 16 |
| Parties | Jimmy S. BUNN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Elliot H. Scherker, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen. and Steven R. Jacob, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before PEARSON, BARKDULL and KEHOE, JJ.
Appellant, defendant below, appeals a judgment of conviction and sentence entered pursuant to a jury verdict on the charges of burglary of a dwelling and grand larceny. We reverse.
Among the points raised by appellant on appeal, his second point is dispositive of this appeal. In this point, appellant contends that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury, as required by Florida Rule Criminal Procedure 3.390, on the manner in which certain of his admissions were to be evaluated and upon the weight to be attributed to such admissions, thereby denying him a fair trial.
Where, as here, the prosecution introduces an inculpatory statement of an accused into evidence, the accused is entitled to have the jury consider the circumstances under which the statement was given to determine the weight or lack of weight to be given to the statement. Normally, the jury must be provided with adequate instructions with which to evaluate the statement. See, e. g., Bates v. State, 78 Fla. 672, 84 So. 373 (1919); Williams v. State, 353 So.2d 588 (Fla.3d DCA 1977); and Fla. Std. Jury Instr. (Crim.) 2.13(i). Here, appellant made no specific request for such a charge at the charge conference, nor was such a charge given when the jury was charged. However, after the jury was charged and prior to the time it retired, appellant objected to the lack of such a charge and requested that one be given. His objection was overruled and the request denied.
Florida Rule Criminal Procedure 3.390(a) requires that the presiding judge shall charge the jury only upon the law of the case, i. e., a charge must be given which covers substantially the elements which the jury should evaluate in considering the credibility to be accorded to the statement. See Leach v. State, 132 So.2d 329 (Fla.1961). Although we feel that the better practice would have been for appellant to have made a request for a specific instruction at the time of the charge conference, the failure of the trial court, pursuant to appellant's request for such an instruction prior to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Palmes v. State
...659, 106 So. 479 (1925); Bates v. State, 78 Fla. 672, 84 So. 373 (1919); Sims v. State, 59 Fla. 38, 52 So. 198 (1910); Bunn v. State, 363 So.2d 16 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 368 So.2d 1373 (Fla.1979); Williams v. State, 353 So.2d 588 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978), cert. dismissed, 372 So.2d 64 ......
-
Smith v. State
...as an example of how failure to advise the jury on the weight to be given a confession could be fundamental error. Bunn v. State, 363 So.2d 16 (Fla.3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 368 So.2d 1373 (Fla.1979), addressed the propriety of a trial court's refusal to give the jury instructions regardi......
-
U.S. v. Brown
...cert. denied, 344 U.S. 858, 73 S.Ct. 96, 97 L.Ed. 666 (1952); Stapleton v. United States, 260 F.2d 415 (9 Cir. 1958); Bunn v. State, 363 So.2d 16 (Fla.App.1978); People v. Lopez, 47 Cal.App.3d 8, 120 Cal.Rptr. 562 (1975); and other state We are not persuaded by these several authorities. So......
-
Broome v. State, 1D14–4566.
...; Rogers v. State, 626 So.2d 339, 340 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) ; Williams v. State, 597 So.2d 377, 379 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992) ; Bunn v. State, 363 So.2d 16, 17 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). Based on his trial testimony, appellant was entitled to have the jury instructed on the justifiable use of nondeadly for......