Delva v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided March 20, 1990

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1990-03-20

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently April 1991

2 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“In a case tried prior to the decision in Dominguez v. State [sic], 509 So.2d 917 (Fla. 1987), is it fundamental error to fail to instruct the jury that in order to convict, the State must prove that defendant knew the substance contained in the package in defendant's car was cocaine, where the instructions were susceptible of the reading that knowing possession of the package containing the substance was sufficient to convict, and where the error is urged on direct appeal from the conviction, not on collateral attack.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including State v. Delva

Relies on 509 So. 2d 917 - State v. Dominguez

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1990-03-20

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ON MOTIONS FOR REHEARING AND CERTIFICATION

PER CURIAM.

¶2We deny the State’s motion for rehearing.

¶3We grant the State’s request for certification of a question of great public importance:

In a case tried prior to the decision in State v. Dominguez, 509 So.2d 917 (Fla.1987), is it fundamental error to fail to instruct the jury that in order to convict, the State must prove that defendant knew the substance contained in the package in defendant’s car was cocaine, where the instructions were susceptible of the reading that knowing possession of the package containing the substance was sufficient to convict, and where the error is urged on direct appeal from the conviction, not on collateral attack.

¶4Motion for rehearing denied; question certified.