Panzavecchia v. State
| Decision Date | 15 April 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 74--1209,74--1209 |
| Citation | 311 So.2d 782 |
| Parties | John E. PANZAVECCHIA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Steven Rappaport, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Lance R. Stelzer, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before BARKDULL, C.J., NATHAN, J., and CHARLES CARROLL (Ret.), Associate Judge.
By an indictment the appellant was charged in one count with first degree murder (for alleged premeditated killing of a named person 'by shooting him with a pistol'), and in a second count the appellant was charged with possession of a firearm having previously been convicted of a felony (passing counterfeit).
The two offenses, being based on the same transaction, or on connected acts or transactions, were properly joined in the one indictment. Rule 3.150(a), RCrP. A timely motion of the defendant for severance of the offenses was denied. 1 On trial before a jury, on the first count the defendant was found guilty of second degree murder, a lesser degree of homicide. On the second count the defendant was found guilty of the charge. From the judgment entered thereon and the concurrent sentences imposed (imprisonment for life on the first count and for five years on the second count) the defendant appealed.
The appellant contends the trial court committed error (1) by denying his motion for severance of the offenses, and (2) by denying his motion for mistrial, for certain statements made by the prosecuting attorney during closing argument, claimed by defendant to be prejudicial.
On consideration thereof in the light of the record, briefs and argument we hold no reversible error has been shown. The matter of severance was one where the trial court was accorded a measure of discretion, the exercise of which will not be disturbed on appeal unless the party challenging it shall sustain his burden to show it represented an abuse of discretion. Bretti v. State, Fla.App.1966, 192 So.2d 6; Moore v. State, Fla.App.1972, 259 So.2d 179; Demps v. State, Fla.1973, 272 So.2d 803. In denying the defendant's motion for severance of the offenses the trial court necessarily concluded that severance was not necessary (or 'appropriate', as stated in the rule) in order for a fair determination of the defendant's guilt or innocence of each offense.
As pointed out by the State, for this court to hold otherwise in this case would be to rule, in effect, that the crime charged in the second count would be required to be severed in any instance in which an accused was charged therewith and with some other crime, in one indictment or information. The prejudice which the appellant argued resulted from the non-severance of the offenses was attributed to the evidence that previously the defendant had been convicted of a wholly unrelated offense, involving some dealing in counterfeit. That evidence, admissible because of its relevancy and materiality under the second count, properly was considered by the trial court not to operate to the prejudice of the defendant in a determination of his guilt or innocence of the murder count, since the defendant was protected by charges given by the court to the jury to decide the guilt or the innocence of the defendant based on the evidence, without regard to such prior offense. In the circumstances of this case we are impelled to conclude that denial of the defendant's motion for severance of the offenses did not represent...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Panzavecchia v. Wainwright, 80-5984
...by the admission of the evidence of his prior conviction, especially in light of the instructions to the jury. Panzavecchia v. State, 311 So.2d 782, 784 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). Petitioner's application for state post-conviction relief was denied and affirmed on appeal. He then filed a petition ......
-
Vazquez v. State
...also State v. Harris, 356 So.2d 315 (Fla.1978). B In reaching this result, we have not overlooked our decision in Panzavecchia v. State, 311 So.2d 782 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975), overruled on other grounds, Williams v. State, 346 So.2d 67 (Fla.1977), upon which the state relies before this court. W......
-
Borges v. State
...So.2d 1038 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976), aff'd, 346 So.2d 67 (Fla.1977); Swyers v. State, 334 So.2d 278 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Panzavecchia v. State, 311 So.2d 782 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Yost v. State, 243 So.2d 469 (Fla. 3d DCA Section 775.021(4), Florida Statutes (1977), provides: Whoever, in the course......
-
Thames v. Dugger
... ... FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY ... In April, 1981, the State Attorney of the First Judicial Circuit of Florida charged Thames with three counts of armed robbery and three counts of possession of a firearm by a ... at 760 ... Florida law concerning severance of unrelated charges was unsettled at the time of Thames's trial. In Panzavecchia v ... State, 311 So.2d 782 (Fla. 3d D.C.A.1975), overruled by State v. Vazquez, 419 So.2d 1088 (Fla.1982), the court held that severance of ... ...