Williams v. State

• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: PER CURIAM
• Citation: Williams v. State, 591 So.2d 319 (Fla. App. 1991)
• Decision Date: 31 December 1991
• Docket Number: No. 90-763,90-763
• Parties: 17 Fla. L. Weekly D147 Gary Lee WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Page 319

591 So.2d 319

17 Fla. L. Weekly D147

Gary Lee WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 90-763.

District Court of Appeal of Florida Third District.

Dec. 31, 1991.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Robert Kalter, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Julie S. Thornton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before NESBITT, COPE and GERSTEN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals his convictions of first-degree murder and firearm possession claiming the court reversibly erred in failing to give a requested jury instruction. We affirm.

In the present case, the trial court gave the "reputation of victim" instruction which is part of Criminal Standard Jury Instruction 3.04(d) (Justifiable Use of Deadly Force). That instruction provides:

If you find that (victim) had a reputation of being a violent and dangerous person and that his reputation was known to the defendant, you may consider this fact in determining whether the actions of the defendant were those of a reasonable person in dealing with an individual of that reputation.

The defense requested a special instruction which simply restated the standard jury instruction in a different form. The proposed instruction began with the same introductory clause as is used in the standard jury instruction. It then substituted "You may consider this fact in also determining his propensity for violence and likelihood that Andrew...