Peters v. State Of Fla.
| Decision Date | 28 April 2010 |
| Docket Number | No. 4D08-3299.,4D08-3299. |
| Citation | 33 So.3d 812 |
| Parties | Taylor PETERS, Appellant,v.STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Christine C. Geraghty, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Myra J. Fried, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
The issue we consider is whether the trial court should have given a special jury instruction regarding “mere presence” at a crime scene or whether the standard jury instruction regarding principal or independent acts was sufficient. We find the standard jury instruction given in this case was sufficient and affirm the conviction for first degree murder.
In May 2003, appellant went to a lounge in Miramar with three other individuals: Jason, Claud, and “Jaja.” When the four men left the lounge hours later, an incident took place in the lounge parking lot. Appellant was struggling with a man, and Claud walked over to them with a gun. Appellant released the man, who got into a car and started to drive in reverse. Claud asked the man where he was going and then fired four to six shots at the driver. Appellant asked Claud, “What the hell are you doing?”
Jaja also had a gun and held a second individual in a chokehold with appellant's help. Jaja then shot the other man when he tried to break free. Claud walked over, shot this second individual again, and took a gold necklace from around the victim's neck. Claud was identified as using an AK-47, and at no time was appellant seen holding or using a firearm of any type. Claud then threatened to shoot Jason when Jason could not find the keys to the vehicle. Appellant found the keys and drove Claud, Jaja, and Jason away from the lounge. Later, appellant told Claud to “handle the situation” if Jason got “any funny ideas.” Jason subsequently avoided appellant, Jaja, and Claud, and eventually Jason moved to the Tampa area about four to five months after the shooting.
As a result of the shooting, victim Amrall Johnson was in a coma for three to five months, and victim Lloyd Bartley died as a result of being shot in the chest. After a jury trial, appellant was convicted of first degree murder of Bartley and acquitted of attempted felony murder of Johnson. Appellant was sentenced to life in prison, and this appeal ensues.
At the charge conference during the jury trial, appellant moved for a special jury instruction that stated that the “mere presence of Taylor Peters at the scene of the crimes and knowledge that those crimes were being committed is not sufficient ... to establish that Taylor Peters aided and abetted the criminal offenses charged.” The trial court declined to give the special instructions requested by appellant and instead read Florida Standard Jury Instruction (Criminal) 3.5(a):
Standard jury instructions are “presumed correct and are preferred over special instructions.” Brown v. State, 11 So.3d 428, 432 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (quoting Stephens v. State, 787 So.2d 747, 755 (Fla.2001)). Using “standard jury instructions does not relieve the trial court of its obligation to determine whether the standard instructions accurately and adequately state the law.” Id. If the trial court determines that the instruction is “erroneous or inadequate,” the court may then modify the standard jury instruction as the “trial judge shall determine to be necessary to instruct the jury accurately and sufficiently.” Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.985.
We review the refusal of the trial court to give the defendant's special instruction under the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reyes v. Fla. Dep't of Corr.
...of deadly force at the time of trial and, in Florida courts, standard instructions are presumed to be correct. See Peters v. State, 33 So.3d 812, 814 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). The Florida Supreme Court has also upheld the standard instruction on the justifiable use of deadly force and, albeit in......
-
Antoine v. State
...instruction as the ‘trial judge shall determine to be necessary to instruct the jury accurately and sufficiently.’ ” Peters v. State, 33 So.3d 812, 814 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (quoting Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.985). Here, the instruction on the reputation of the victim, drawn from Florida Standard Ju......
-
Bassallo v. State Of Fla.
...to a physical one. "Standard jury instructions are 'presumed correct and are preferred over special instructions.'" Peters v. State, 33 So. 3d 812, 814 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (quoting Brown v. State, 11 So. 3d 428, 432 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (quoting Stephens v. State, 787 So. 2d 747, 755 (Fla. 20......
-
Reyes v. Fla. Dep't of Corr.
... ... relevant law in this case while giving due deference to the ... state court as mandated by AEDPA ... The ... Objections do not take issue with the Report's legal ... standard ... issue is standard in Florida, and in Florida courts, standard ... instructions are presumed to be correct. See Peters v ... State, 33 So.3d 812, 814 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) ... Considering the arguments de novo, the Court agrees ... with the Report ... ...
-
The trial (conduct of trial, jury instructions, verdict)
...refusing to give the special. (See this case for discussion of when the court should give a special jury instruction.) Peters v. State, 33 So. 3d 812 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) Defendant was found inside an abandoned house and admitted to stripping copper wire from the walls. He was charged with b......
-
Appeals
...theory of defense, and (3) the special instruction is a correct statement of the law and not misleading or confusing. Peters v. State, 33 So. 3d 812 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) In reviewing the facts in a defendant’s appeal from a conviction, the appellate court views the facts in the light most fa......