Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

76 So. 3d 378

Garrido v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 28, 2011

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2011-12-28

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently September 2013

1 state decisions

Relies on 48 So. 3d 885 - Riesel v. State · 48 So. 3d 159 - Pryor v. State · Noack v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2011-12-28

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1 William Garrido appeals his conviction and sentence for second degree murder, alleging the trial court erred in the manslaughter instruction given to the jury. We affirm based on Figueroa v. State, 77 So.3d 714, 2011 WL 5554830 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011). As we did in Figueroa, we certify conflict with the First District’s opinions in Noack v. State, 61 So.3d 1208 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011), Pryor v. State, 48 So.3d 159 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010), and Riesel v. State, 48 So.3d 885 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010).

¶2 Additionally, we certify the following question to the Florida Supreme Court as one of great public importance:

IF A JURY RETURNS A VERDICT FINDING A DEFENDANT GUILTY OF SECOND-DEGREE MURDER IN A CASE WHERE THE EVIDENCE DOES NOT SUPPORT A THEORY OF CULPABLE NEGLIGENCE, DOES A TRIAL COURT COMMIT FUNDAMENTAL ERROR BY GIVING A FLAWED MANSLAUGHTER BY ACT INSTRUCTION WHEN IT ALSO GIVES AN INSTRUCTION ON MANSLAUGHTER BY CULPABLE NEGLIGENCE?

¶3 Affirmed.

/76/so3d/378 · .json · Public domain