Factual and Procedural Setting

It is reported that the defendant was charged with second-degree murder for the shooting death of the victim. The incident occurred after a prior dispute between the victim, the defendant’s girlfriend, and a neighbor. On the day of the shooting, the victim was attempting to contact his father, who had borrowed his truck, when the victim, his girlfriend, and their children drove to locate him. They encountered a vehicle driven by the neighbor, with the defendant as a passenger. The victim approached the defendant’s vehicle, and the defendant, claiming self-defense, shot the victim multiple times.

Allegedly, the defendant believed the victim was armed and acting aggressively, though no weapon was found on the victim. At trial, the defense sought to include a jury instruction on the justifiable use of deadly force, specifically requesting that aggravated assault be listed as a felony justifying such force. The trial court denied this request, instead allowing the inclusion of burglary. The defendant was subsequently convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to fifty years in prison, followed by lifetime probation. The defendant appealed the conviction, arguing that the trial court erred in excluding the aggravated assault instruction.

Self-Defense Jury Instructions in Violent Crime Cases

On appeal, the court’s sole focus was the trial court’s decision to exclude aggravated assault from the self-defense jury instruction. The standard of review for such a decision is abuse of discretion, particularly considering that a criminal defendant is entitled to have the jury instructed on any theory of defense supported by evidence, regardless of how slight.

The court noted that Florida law justifies the use of deadly force if it is necessary to prevent imminent death, great bodily harm, or the imminent commission of a forcible felony, such as aggravated assault. Although the evidence suggested the victim was unarmed, the defendant’s girlfriend testified that the victim appeared to be holding a gun, which supported the defendant’s theory of self-defense.

Ultimately, the court concluded that this testimony provided a sufficient basis for including aggravated assault in the jury instruction. The trial court’s refusal to do so was deemed a reversible error because it undermined the defendant’s sole defense. As a result, the court reversed the conviction and sentence, remanding the case for a new trial.

Talk to a Skilled Tampa Criminal Defense Lawyer

If you are accused of a violent offense, it is essential to know what defenses you may be able to assert, and it is in your best interest to talk to an attorney. The skilled Tampa violent crime defense lawyers at Hanlon Law can assess the facts of your case and help you pursue the best legal result possible. You can reach Hanlon Law using our online form or by calling 813-228-7095 to arrange a meeting.

The post Florida Court Discusses Self Defense Jury Instructions in Violent Crime Cases appeared first on Tampa Criminal Lawyer Blog.

Procedural History of the Case

It is reported that the defendant pleaded guilty to a federal charge of being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm. Due to the defendant’s four prior convictions for violent crimes, the court ruled that the defendant should be sentenced to increased penalties under the ACCA and sentenced him to 211 months in prison.

Allegedly, the court relied on the conclusion that aggravated assault with a deadly weapon qualified as a violent felony under the ACCA. The defendant appealed his conviction and sentence, and the court affirmed. He filed a petition for rehearing, and the court certified his questions to the Florida Supreme Court.

Violent Crimes Under the ACCA Element’s Clause

On appeal, the court answered the question of whether the first element of assault as defined by Florida law required specific intent, and if not, what mens rea was required to establish that element of the law. The court clarified that specific intent is generally understood as designating a special mental element that is required above and beyond any mental state required to establish the act that constitutes the crime.

The court noted, though, that whether assault under Florida law is considered a specific or general intent crime was largely irrelevant, as it did not answer the question of whether it was a violent felony as defined by the elements clause of the ACCA. Instead, the ACCA elements clause expressly required that the defendant direct their actions at a certain target, specifically, another person.

As such, if the Florida aggravated assault crime required that the prosecution show a specific intent to attempt, threaten, or use physical force against another person, then it would qualify as an ACCA violent felony predicate offense, and the defendant’s enhanced sentence under the ACCA must be upheld. In other words, the focus was whether the crime in question required specific intent to direct action instead of whether it was merely a specific intent crime. The court ultimately answered in the affirmative and upheld the defendant’s sentence.

Meet with an Experienced Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney

Aggravated assault is considered a violent crime, and an assault conviction can result in increased sentences for people with a criminal history. If you are charged with assault, it is prudent to speak to an attorney about your potential defenses. The experienced Tampa lawyers of Hanlon Law are proficient at helping people charged with crimes seek favorable outcomes, and if you hire us, we will work tirelessly on your behalf. You can reach Hanlon Law by using the form online or by calling us at 813-228-7095 to set up a conference.

The post Florida Court Analyzes What Constitutes a Violent Crime Under the ACCA appeared first on Tampa Criminal Lawyer Blog.

Facts Regarding the Charges and Conviction

The defendant was charged with aggravated battery and aggravated assault. The information alleged that the defendant committed an aggravated battery in the alternative. In other words, it alleged that the defendant used a firearm or knowingly caused great bodily harm in committing the battery. Following a trial, he was convicted of both counts. Regarding the aggravated battery charge, the jury included a special verdict that stated that the defendant possessed and discharged a firearm causing great bodily harm. Similarly, the guilty verdict for the aggravated assault charge contained a special verdict stating the defendant possessed and displayed a firearm in the course of committing the crime. The defendant was subsequently sentenced to twenty-five years imprisonment for each charge, after which he moved to correct the sentences, arguing they were illegal.

Enhanced Sentences

The post-conviction relief court granted the defendant relief as to the sentence for the assault charge. Thus, the appellate court only addressed whether the sentence for the battery charge was proper. The court noted that if a person is convicted of aggravated battery in which he or she discharged a firearm and as a result of the discharge caused great bodily harm, the person will be sentenced to an enhanced minimum sentence of twenty-five years imprisonment. To pursue an enhanced mandatory sentence due to the use of a firearm, however, the State is required to set forth the grounds for the enhancement in the charging document. The State’s failure to precisely charge the elements cannot be cured by a jury’s findings.

In the subject case, the court noted that the information did not allege that the defendant discharged the firearm, or that the defendant used the firearm to cause bodily harm. As the information was defective in that it omitted a necessary element, the court reversed the defendant’s sentence and remanded with instructions for the ten-year minimum sentence to be imposed.

Speak with a Trusted Tampa Violent Crime Defense Attorney Regarding Your Case

If you live in Tampa and are charged with one or more violent crimes it is in your best interest to speak with a trusted Tampa criminal defense attorney to discuss your case and what defenses you may be able to set forth. William Hanlon of Hanlon Law is a seasoned Tampa violent crimes defense attorney who will aggressively advocate on your behalf to help you seek the best legal result possible under the facts of your case. You can reach Mr. Hanlon at 813-228-7095 or through the online form to schedule a confidential and free meeting to discuss your case.

The post Florida Court Discusses Requirements for Imposing an Enhanced Sentence appeared first on Tampa Criminal Lawyer Blog.

The court said the defendant’s answers were accurate. The burglary and grand theft convictions were for felony offenses. The grand theft and petit theft convictions were for crimes involving dishonesty. But after the defendant was convicted on the aggravated assault charge, he appealed the decision. He said the prosecutors asked the questions in a way that wrongly made it seem to the jury like he was lying about his previous convictions. The Fifth District disagreed.

“Although the questions could have been more precise, it does not appear that the prosecutor intended to mislead the jury,” the court said. “Nor do we believe that the testimony, to which there was no objection, rises to the level of fundamental error.”

The court explained that a fundamental error is a mistake that “reaches down into the validity of the verdict itself” in a way that the verdict could not have been reached without the error. In this case, however, the court said the state prosecutor mentioned the defendant’s criminal history briefly and in passing during closing arguments in the trial. He didn’t, according to the court, mention the number of the defendant’s prior convictions.

As a result, the Fifth District affirmed the conviction.

If you or a loved one has been charged with aggravated assault or a wide range of other crimes in the state of Florida, it is essential that you seek the advice and counsel of an experienced attorney. Tampa criminal lawyer Will Hanlon is a seasoned attorney who will fight aggressively on behalf of clients who have been charged with a wide range of offenses. Call our offices at (813) 228-7095 or contact us online to speak with Mr. Hanlon about your case.

More blog posts:

Mandatory Minimum Sentences in Florida Criminal Cases

Constructive Possession in Florida Gun Crime Cases

When Can Cops Stop You on the Street in Florida?

The post Can Florida Prosecutors Use Your Criminal History Against You in Court? appeared first on Tampa Criminal Lawyer Blog.