Redondo v. State
| Decision Date | 23 July 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 59032,59032 |
| Citation | 403 So.2d 954 |
| Parties | Ricardo REDONDO, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Peter Kutner, Law Office of Henry R. Carr, Miami, for petitioner.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., James H. Greason and Theda R. James, Asst. Attys. Gen., Miami, for respondent.
This cause is before the Court on petition for certiorari to review the decision in Redondo v. State, 380 So.2d 1107 (Fla.3d DCA 1980). We find express and direct conflict with Mahaun v. State, 377 So.2d 1158 (Fla.1979), and therefore have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla.Const.
Petitioner was charged by a two-count information with aggravated battery and the unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in the commission of a felony. The case was tried before a jury. On the aggravated battery charge, the jury returned a verdict of guilty of the lesser included offense of simple battery. On the firearm charge, the jury found petitioner guilty as charged of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony.
The trial court initially entered judgment on both convictions, but later granted a motion for arrest of judgment on the firearm charge on the ground that it was inconsistent with the jury's acquittal of petitioner on the underlying felony charge.
On appeal, the district court reversed the judgment of conviction of simple battery due to an error the trial court made in instructing the jury. The case was ordered remanded for a new trial on a charge of simple battery, since a re-trial of the aggravated battery accusation was barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause.
The state cross-appealed the trial court's order in arrest of judgment on the firearm charge. The district court reversed the order, reasoning that although technically inconsistent with the jury's verdict on the underlying felony charge, the guilty verdict for possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony was within the power of the jury to return. Although holding that the trial court erred, the appellate court declined to simply reinstate the judgment, since the same error in jury instructions that called for a new trial on the battery accusation also required one on the firearm possession charge. The court remanded for a new trial for the misdemeanor of simple battery and the crime of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony.
In Mahaun v. State, 377 So.2d 1158 (Fla.1979), the appellants were charged with third-degree felony murder and aggravated child abuse. Patricia Mahaun was found guilty by the jury of third-degree felony murder and child abuse by culpable negligence, a lesser included misdemeanor of the felony of aggravated child abuse. We concluded that by returning the verdict of guilty of the misdemeanor the jury had acquitted her of the felony of aggravated child abuse. We held that since the felony of aggravated child abuse was an essential element of the felony murder, Mrs. Mahaun could not be convicted on the latter charge.
In the present case the jury in effect acquitted...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Morris v. State
...a specific element necessary for conviction on the other count." Gonzalez v. State, 440 So.2d 514 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). See Redondo v. State, 403 So.2d 954 (Fla.1981); Mahaun v. State, 377 So.2d 1158 (Fla.1979); Ayrado v. State, 431 So.2d 320 (Fla.3d DCA 1983). As the supreme court recently ......
-
Torrence v. State
...proofs and instructions were adequate to sustain his conviction thereunder, and the jury found him guilty. I do not think Redondo v. State, 403 So.2d 954 (Fla.1981), is applicable to this case. Here, Torrence was not acquitted by the jury of the underlying felony. To the contrary, he was fo......
-
Shell v. State
...and conviction are not tolerated even when rendered by juries. See, e.g., De Sacia v. State, 469 P.2d 369 (Alaska 1970); Redondo v. State, 403 So.2d 954 (Fla.1981); Kuck v. State, 149 Ga. 191, 99 S.E. 622 (1919); People v. Frias, 99 Ill.2d 193, 75 Ill.Dec. 674, 457 N.E.2d 1233 (1983). At th......
-
Weiand v. State
...1177, 1179 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Redondo v. State, 380 So.2d 1107, 1110 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), quashed in part on other grounds, 403 So.2d 954 (Fla. 1981); see also Fla. Std. Jury Instr. (Crim.), "Justifiable Use of Nondeadly Force," § 3.04(e), at 5. The "castle doctrine" has also been def......
-
The trial (conduct of trial, jury instructions, verdict)
...verdicts are permissible as a reflection of the jury’s decision to display lenience through a partial jury pardon. (See Redondo v. State, 403 So. 2d 954, 956 (Fla. 1981) or Mahaun v. State, 377 So. 2d 1158, 1161 (Fla. 1979) for examples of offenses that are legally interlocking.) Qosaj v. S......
-
When is an inconsistent verdict not inconsistent?
...of the jury to convict on a felony, which is an essential element of another count being tried.(10) For example, in Redondo v. State, 403 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 1981), the defendant was charged with one count of aggravated battery and one count of unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in......