Holloway v. State, 55266
| Decision Date | 31 January 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 55266,55266 |
| Citation | 379 So.2d 953 |
| Parties | Eugene HOLLOWAY, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Warren S. Schwartz, Asst. Public Defender, Miami, for petitioner.
Steven L. Bolotin, Asst. Atty. Gen., Miami, for respondent.
The Court having accepted jurisdiction and heard argument, and upon further consideration of the matter, we have determined that the Court is without jurisdiction. Therefore, certiorari is denied.
No Motion for Rehearing will be entertained by the Court. See Fla.R.App.P. 9.330(d).
This case is before us on conflict certiorari to review Holloway v. State, 362 So.2d 333 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). The decision of the district court conflicts with Brown v. State, 206 So.2d 377 (Fla.1968), and that court's attempt to distinguish Brown does not convince me. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b) (3), Fla.Const.
Petitioner was convicted of first-degree murder. The murder was committed on November 7, 1972. Petitioner was tried pursuant to indictment filed June 23, 1976. After the presentation of evidence to the jury, petitioner requested that the court instruct the jury on the lesser offenses of second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and manslaughter. The court declined to so instruct the jury, on the ground that instructions on lesser offenses are not required when the statutory limitations period has expired on such lesser offenses. See § 932.465, Fla.Stat. (1971). The district court affirmed, holding that since a defendant may not be convicted of any lesser offense on which the statute of limitations has run, the court is not required to instruct the jury on any such lesser offense.
Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.490 provides:
If the indictment or information charges an offense which is divided into degrees, without specifying the degree, the jurors may find the defendant guilty of any degree of the offense charged; if the indictment or information charges a particular degree the jurors may find the defendant guilty of the degree charged or of any lesser degree. The court shall in all such cases charge the jury as to the degrees of the offense.
We have held that it is error to violate the strict mandate of this rule. State v. Abreau, 363 So.2d 1063 (Fla.1978); Brown v. State, 206 So.2d 377 (Fla.1968).
The accused has a right to have the jury instructed on all less serious included offenses regardless of the expiration of the limitations period on the lesser offenses. The purpose of these instructions is to guide the jury in reaching the proper verdict and the running of the statute of limitations should have no effect.
The function of the jury, in reaching the proper verdict, is to make factual and not legal determinations. If the jury finds that the conduct of the accused fits under a certain category of crime, it so informs the court in its verdict. The judge then decides the legal question of whether upon the verdict rendered an adjudication of guilt is proper. If the verdict...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tucker v. State
...those lesser-included offenses, we find no reversible error. In Holloway v. State, 362 So.2d 333 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 379 So.2d 953 (Fla.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 905, 101 S.Ct. 281, 66 L.Ed.2d 137 (1980), this court held that it was not error to refuse to charge lesser deg......
-
State v. Stillwell
...State, 89 Wis.2d 214, 278 N.W.2d 235, 237 (Wis.Ct.App.1979); Holloway v. State, 362 So.2d 333, 334 (Fla.Ct.App.1978), cert. den. 379 So.2d 953 (Fla.Sup.Ct.1980); Duncan v. State, 282 Md. 385, 384 A.2d 456 (App.1978); State v. Fogel, 16 Ariz.App. 246, 492 P.2d 742 (App.Div.1972); City of Cle......
-
Tucker v. State
...(emphasis in original, footnote omitted), denying cert. to, Holloway v. State, 362 So.2d 333 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 379 So.2d 953 (Fla.1980). The jury need not and should not be told that the statute of limitations applicable to the less serious, included offenses has expired. To......
-
State v. Sullivan, 86-168
...1976); People v. Morgan, 75 Cal.App.3d 32, 141 Cal.Rptr. 863 (1977); Holloway v. State, 362 So.2d 333 (Fla.Ct.App.1978), cert. denied, 379 So.2d 953, cert. denied, 449 U.S. 905, 101 S.Ct. 281, 66 L.Ed.2d 137 (1980); State v. Stillwell, 175 N.J.Super. 244, 418 A.2d 267 From its inception thi......