Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

941 So. 2d 1291

Docket No. 4D05-2012.

Barton v. State

Stanley J. BARTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided November 22, 2006.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2006-11-22

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently April 2008

1 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“impermissibly negate[d] the defendant's claim of self-defense”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 980 So. 2d 1061 - State v. Kettell

Relies on 935 So. 2d 107 - Jackson v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2006-11-22

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and James W. McIntire, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

¶2Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and August A. Bonavita, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4The defendant appeals his conviction and sentence for aggravated battery. We agree with the defendant that the trial court committed fundamental error by instructing the jury that the defendant's use of force was not justifiable if he was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of aggravated battery. This instruction would only have been appropriate had the defendant been engaged in some other forcible felony. In the absence of such an independent felony, the instruction is circular and impermissibly negates the defendant's claim of self-defense. Jackson v. State, 935 So.2d 107 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). The defendant is entitled to a new trial.

¶5Reversed and Remanded.

¶6STEVENSON, C.J., WARNER and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

/941/so2d/1291 · .json · Public domain