Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases (93-1), 82438
| Decision Date | 05 May 1994 |
| Docket Number | No. 82438,82438 |
| Citation | 636 So.2d 502 |
| Parties | 19 Fla. L. Weekly S244 STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES (93-1). |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Fredricka Greene Smith, Chair, The Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases, Miami, Florida, for petitioner.
Bernie McCabe, State Atty., and Joseph M. Walker, III, Asst. State Atty., Sixth Judicial Circuit, Clearwater, and Stephen Krosschell, Valrico.
The Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions (Criminal) has submitted recommended amendments to the Florida Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases as follows:
1. The committee recommends an amendment to standard jury instruction 3.04(b) (page 38 of the manual) regarding proceedings in insanity cases. The committee believes that the amended instruction more accurately reflects the procedures established in Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.217.
2. The committee recommends a new instruction on insanity--psychotropic medication which is required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.215(c)(2). See Rosales v. State, 547 So.2d 221 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).
3. The committee recommends a new set of instructions on attempted murder and manslaughter because of its belief that an instruction integrating elements of attempt with the elements of murder is more understandable than reading the standard instruction on attempt to commit a crime together with the instruction on murder. 1
Following publication of the recommendations in The Florida Bar News, the committee received two letters concerning its proposed amendments. As a result of one of these letters, the committee amended its recommendation with respect to attempted first-degree felony murder. As a result of the other letter, the committee amended its recommendation with respect to attempted voluntary manslaughter, and in order to maintain consistency also proposed a new instruction on manslaughter.
With certain technical changes, the amendments recommended by the committee are set forth in the appendix attached to this opinion. We approve for publication the amendments set forth in the appendix. However, we caution all interested persons that the notes and comments reflect only the opinion of the committee and are not necessarily indicative of the views of this Court as to their correctness or applicability. The amendments as set forth in the appendix shall be effective when this opinion becomes final. We wish to express our appreciation to the committee for its dedication in presenting to the Court its recommendations.
It is so ordered.
APPENDIX
The following table has additions that are not indicated and/or deletions that are not included.
1. The wording of the last sentence of instruction
3.04(b) (page 38 of the manual) is changed as
follows
I must conduct further proceedings to determine if the
defendant should be committed to a mental hospital
or given other outpatient treatment or released
2. New instruction on Insanity--Psychotropic Medication:
INSANITY--PSYCHOTROPIC MEDICATION
Note to Judge: Give, if requested by defendant, at the beginning of
trial and in the charge to the jury.
(Defendant) is currently being administered
psychotropic medication under medical supervision
for a mental or emotional condition.
Psychotropic medication is any drug or compound
affecting the mind or behavior, intellectual
functions, perception, moods, or emotion and
includes anti-psychotic, anti-depressant, anti-manic
and anti-anxiety drugs.
3. New instructions on attempted murder and manslaughter:
INTRODUCTION TO ATTEMPTED HOMICIDE
Note to Judge Read in all attempted murder and attempted
manslaughter cases.
In this case (defendant) is accused of (crime
charged).
Give degrees Attempted murder in the first degree includes the
as lesser crimes of attempted murder in the second
applicable degree, attempted murder in the third degree and
attempted voluntary manslaughter, all of which are
unlawful.
An attempted killing that is excusable or was
committed by the use of justifiable deadly force is
lawful.
If you find that there was an attempted killing of
(victim) by (defendant), you will then consider the
circumstances surrounding the attempted killing in
deciding if it was attempted first degree murder, or
attempted second degree murder, or attempted third
degree murder, or attempted voluntary manslaughter,
or whether the attempted killing was excusable or
resulted from justifiable use of deadly force.
JUSTIFIABLE ATTEMPTED HOMICIDE
The attempted killing of a human being is justifiable
and lawful if necessarily done while resisting an
attempt to murder or commit a felony upon the
defendant, or to commit a felony in any dwelling
house in which the defendant was at the time of the
killing.
EXCUSABLE ATTEMPTED HOMICIDE
The attempted killing of a human being is excusable
and therefore lawful under any one of the three
following circumstances:
1. When the attempted killing is committed by accident
and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful
means with usual ordinary caution and without any
unlawful intent, or
2. When the attempted killing occurs by accident or
misfortune in the heat of passion, upon any sudden
and sufficient provocation, or
3. When the attempted killing is committed by accident
and misfortune resulting from a sudden combat, if a
dangerous weapon is not used and the attempted
killing is not done in a cruel and unusual manner.
Definition "Dangerous weapon" is any weapon that, taking into
account the manner in which it is used, is likely to
produce death or great bodily harm.
I now instruct you on the circumstances that must be
proved before defendant may be found guilty of
attempted murder or any lesser included crime.
ATTEMPTED MURDER--FIRST DEGREE (PREMEDITATED) F.S.
782.04(1)(a) and 777.04
Before you can find the defendant guilty of Attempted
First Degree Premeditated Murder, the State must
prove the following three elements beyond a
reasonable doubt:
Elements 1. The defendant did some act intended to cause the death
of (victim) that went beyond just thinking or
talking about it.
2. Defendant acted with a premeditated design to kill
(victim).
3. The act would have resulted in the death of (victim)
except that someone prevented the defendant from
killing (victim) or [he] [she] failed to do so.
Definition A premeditated design to kill means that there was a
conscious decision to kill. The decision must be
present in the mind at the time the act was
committed. The law does not fix the exact period of
time that must pass between the formation of the
premeditated intent to kill and the act. The period
of time must be long enough to allow reflection by
the defendant. The premeditated intent to kill must
be formed before the act was committed.
The question of premeditation is a question of fact to
be determined by you from the evidence. It will be
sufficient proof of premeditation if the
circumstances of the attempted killing and the
conduct of the accused convince you beyond a
reasonable doubt of the existence of premeditation
at the time of the attempted killing.
It is not an attempt to commit first degree
premeditated murder if the defendant abandoned the
attempt to commit the offense or otherwise prevented
its commission under
...To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hylor v. United States, 17-10856
...17, 21 (Fla. 2001), overruled on other grounds , Valdes v. State , 3 So.3d 1067 (Fla. 2009) ; see also In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases , 636 So.2d 502, 504 (Fla. 1994) ; St. Hubert , 883 F.3d at 1334 (relying on a Seventh Circuit decision that held that "when a substantiv......
-
Fuller v. Cannon
...given in petitioner's trial was approved by the Florida Supreme Court and had been in use since 1994. See Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases (93-1), 636 So.2d 502 (Fla. 1994); In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases - No. 2006-1, 946 So.2d 1061, 1062 (Fla. 2006). Some f......
-
In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases—Report 2017-06
...be needed in those cases. This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1985 [ 477 So.2d 985 ], 1992 [ 603 So.2d 1175 ], 1994 [ 636 So.2d 502 ], 2005 [ 911 So.2d 1220 ], 2006 [ 946 So.2d 1061 ], 2008 [ 997 So.2d 403 ], 2010 [ 41 So.3d 853 ], 2011 [ 75 So.3d 210 ], and 2017 [ 213 So.3d......
-
Perez v. Dept. of Corrections
...Court Jury Instruction Committee shared its views. 641 So.2d at 1366-67 (citing Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases 93-1, 636 So.2d 502, 502 n. 1 (Fla. 1994)). The Grinage court added that "it is our responsibility (while not reversing the supreme court) to point out to [this] cour......