Gomez v. State, Case No. 5D18-2903
| Decision Date | 28 June 2019 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 5D18-2903 |
| Parties | Verne Ecedro GOMEZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Thomas J. Lukashow, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Andrea K. Totten, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
Verne Ecedro Gomez appeals his judgment and sentence for attempted second-degree murder. The sole argument that he raises here is that the trial court committed fundamental error by failing to instruct the jury on justifiable attempted homicide and excusable attempted homicide as contained in Florida Standard Jury Instruction (Criminal) 6.1 (2017). Because Gomez's trial counsel affirmatively agreed to the instruction being read to the jury without the definitions of justifiable attempted homicide and excusable attempted homicide, we affirm.
A trial court's failure to instruct the jury on either justifiable or excusable attempted homicide is fundamental error when a defendant is convicted of attempted manslaughter or a greater offense not more than one step removed. State v. Spencer , 216 So. 3d 481, 483 (Fla. 2017). However, there are two exceptions to the application of the one-step-removed fundamental error analysis regarding the trial court's failure to instruct the jury on justifiable or excusable attempted homicide. Id. at 485–86. The first exception, recognized in State v. Lucas , 645 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 1994), and Armstrong v. State , 579 So. 2d 734 (Fla. 1991), provides that there is no fundamental error where defense counsel affirmatively agreed to or requested an incomplete instruction, and it is directly applicable here.
During the jury instruction charge conference in Gomez's trial, the prosecutor specifically announced that based upon her earlier discussions with defense counsel, she had removed the justifiable and excusable attempted homicide language from the proposed introduction to attempted homicide jury instruction. The prosecutor further explained that the applicable case law also required the defense to make an express affirmative representation of its intent not to seek these instructions. In response, Gomez's trial counsel affirmatively agreed on the record and to the court that she was not seeking this instruction.
In Spencer , the court "reiterate[d] that the Lucas / Armstrong exception to the fundamental error rule...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brady v. State
...the homicide or attempted homicide was not justified or excusable."2 Spencer, 216 So. 3d at 486, 488 ; see, e.g., Gomez v. State, 274 So. 3d 1237, 1238 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019) (holding that the first situation applied where defense counsel "affirmatively agreed on the record and to the court th......
-
K.R. v. State, Case No. 5D18-3137
...concedes error.A juvenile, who is on probation for a misdemeanor and who is being adjudicated for a technical probation violation, may be 274 So.3d 1237 committed to a nonsecure residential placement only if the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the protection of the publi......