Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
20 Florida opinions name it 3 courts 1989–2025 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Reed v. Stategreen2 sentences2017Thus, the State continues, it is unlikely. that the jury got confused. “[Wjhether the evidence of guilt, is overwhelming or whether the prosecutor has or has not made an inaccurate instruction a feature of the prosecution’s argument are not germane to whether the error is fundamental.” Reed v. State, 837 So.2d 366, 369 (Fla. 2002). 2017See State v. Montgomery, 39 So.3d 252, 258 (Fla. 2010) (“Failing to instruct on an element of the crime over which the record reflects there was no dispute is not fundamental error and there must be an objection to preserve the issue for appeal.” (quoting Delva, 575 So.2d at 645 )); Reed v. State, 837 So.2d 366, 369 (Fla. 2002) (“[Wjhether the evidence of guilt is overwhelming or whether the prosecutor has or has not made an inaccurate instruction a feature of the prosecution’s argument are not germane to whether the error is fundamental,” rather, “[i]t is fundamental error if the inaccurately | 8 | 10 |
Stewart v. Stategreen2 sentences2017See State v. Montgomery, 39 So.3d 252, 258 (Fla. 2010) (“Failing to instruct on an element of the crime over which the record reflects there was no dispute is not fundamental error and there must be an objection to preserve the issue for appeal.” (quoting Delva, 575 So.2d at 645 )); Reed v. State, 837 So.2d 366, 369 (Fla. 2002) (“[Wjhether the evidence of guilt is overwhelming or whether the prosecutor has or has not made an inaccurate instruction a feature of the prosecution’s argument are not germane to whether the error is fundamental,” rather, “[i]t is fundamental error if the inaccurately 2017Here, however, it is simply impossible to imagine any circumstance under which it could be said that Mr. Thames inadvertently or unknowingly possessed the Chevrolet Caprice he was leaning against when he conducted this drug transaction. -7- whether the prosecutor has or has not made an inaccurate instruction a feature of the prosecution's argument are not germane to whether the error is fundamental," rather, "[i]t is fundamental error if the inaccurately defined . . . element is disputed, and the inaccurate definition 'is pertinent or material to what the jury must consider in order to convict | 4 | 4 |
State v. Delvagreen2 sentences2017See State v. Montgomery, 39 So.3d 252, 258 (Fla. 2010) (“Failing to instruct on an element of the crime over which the record reflects there was no dispute is not fundamental error and there must be an objection to preserve the issue for appeal.” (quoting Delva, 575 So.2d at 645 )); Reed v. State, 837 So.2d 366, 369 (Fla. 2002) (“[Wjhether the evidence of guilt is overwhelming or whether the prosecutor has or has not made an inaccurate instruction a feature of the prosecution’s argument are not germane to whether the error is fundamental,” rather, “[i]t is fundamental error if the inaccurately 2003Like State v.Delva, 575 So.2d 643 (Fla.1991), Reed stands for the proposition that the giving of an inaccurate instruction as to a disputed element of a crime is fundamental error. | 2 | 4 |
Haygood v. Stategreen2 sentences2015She further argues Morris was implicitly overruled by Montgomery, 39 So.3d at 259 , and Haygood v. State, 109 So.3d 735, 741 (Fla.2013), in which the supreme court held that an inaccurate instruction on manslaughter as a lesser-in- eluded offense only one step removed can constitute fundamental error. 2014If a jury instruction defines a disputed element in a materially inaccurate way, “ 'whether the evidence of guilt is overwhelming or whether the prosecutor has or has not made an inaccurate instruction a feature of the prosecution’s argument are not germane to whether the error is fundamental.’ ” Haygood, 109 So.3d at 741 (quoting Reed v. State, 837 So.2d 366, 369 (Fla.2002)). | 2 | 3 |
State v. Montgomerygreen2 sentences2017See State v. Montgomery, 39 So.3d 252, 258 (Fla. 2010) (“Failing to instruct on an element of the crime over which the record reflects there was no dispute is not fundamental error and there must be an objection to preserve the issue for appeal.” (quoting Delva, 575 So.2d at 645 )); Reed v. State, 837 So.2d 366, 369 (Fla. 2002) (“[Wjhether the evidence of guilt is overwhelming or whether the prosecutor has or has not made an inaccurate instruction a feature of the prosecution’s argument are not germane to whether the error is fundamental,” rather, “[i]t is fundamental error if the inaccurately 2015She further argues Morris was implicitly overruled by Montgomery, 39 So.3d at 259 , and Haygood v. State, 109 So.3d 735, 741 (Fla.2013), in which the supreme court held that an inaccurate instruction on manslaughter as a lesser-in- eluded offense only one step removed can constitute fundamental error. | 1 | 4 |
State v. Lucasgreen1 sentence2015Alternatively, appellant argues that if this court finds Morris correctly interpreted Jones as holding that the failure to request an instruction on a necessarily lesser-included offense in a non-capital case is not fundamental error, then appellant argues Jones is inconsistent with Montgomery, Haygood, and State v. Lucas, 645 So.2d 425, 426-27 (Fla.1994), all of which held an incomplete or erroneous instruction on manslaughter as a lesser-included offense only one step removed may be fundamental error. | 1 | 1 |
Daniels v. Stategreen1 sentence2014Specifically, “where the trial court fails to correctly instruct on an element of the crime over which there is dispute, and that element is both pertinent and material to what the jury must consider in order to decide if the defendant is guilty of the crime charged or any of its lesser included offenses, fundamental error occurs.” Daniels v. State, 121 So.3d 409, 418 (Fla.2013). “‘[Wjhether the evidence of guilt is overwhelming or whether the prosecutor has or has not made an inaccurate instruction a feature of the prosecution’s argument are not [determinative or even] germane to whether the | 1 | 1 |
Palazzolo v. Stategreen1 sentence2006See also Palazzolo v. State, 754 So.2d 731 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)(instruction regarding essential element of sexual battery was fundamental error where instruction was erroneous and where there were misleading comments *1162 made during trial); Dowling v. State, 723 So.2d 307 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)(failure to give a complete or accurate instruction for the offense of false imprisonment constitutes fundamental error as it relates to an element of the charged offense). | 1 | 1 |
State v. DiGuiliogreen1 sentence2001See State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Francis v. State
neutral
1 sentence2015Subsequently, in light of the Florida Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Montgomery, 39 So.3d 252 (Fla.2010), which held that an inaccurate instruction on manslaughter as a lesser-included offense only one step removed constitutes fundamental error, we vacated Francis’s conviction for the attempted second-degree murder counts in Francis v. State, 77 So.3d 806 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Williams v. State
green
2 sentences2015“This is true regardless of whether there is ample evidence to convict the defendant of the higher crime.” Williams, 123 So.3d at 29 . “ ‘[Wjhether the evidence of guilt is overwhelming or whether the prosecutor has or has not made an inaccurate instruction a feature of the prosecution’s argument are not germane to whether the error is fundamental.’ ” Id. (quoting Reed v. State, 837 So.2d 366, 369 (Fla.2002)). 2015“This is true regardless of whether there is ample evidence to convict the defendant of the higher crime.” Williams, 123 So.3d at 29 . “ ‘[Wjhether the evidence of guilt is overwhelming or whether the prosecutor has or has not made an inaccurate instruction a feature of the prosecution’s argument are not germane to whether the error is fundamental.’ ” Id. (quoting Reed v. State, 837 So.2d 366, 369 (Fla.2002)). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Garzon v. State
green
2 sentences2009While the supreme court has now made it clear that the whole context must be considered, Garzon, 980 So.2d at 1041 , the dispositive question remains whether (in the context of the whole case) the inaccurate instruction was “pertinent or material to what the jury must consider in order to convict.” Stewart v. State, 420 So.2d 862, 863 (Fla.1982) (quoted with approval in Reed, 837 So.2d at 369 ). 2009While the supreme court has now made it clear that the whole context must be considered, Garzon, 980 So.2d at 1041 , the dispositive question remains whether (in the context of the whole case) the inaccurate instruction was "pertinent or material to what the jury must consider in order to convict." Stewart v. State, 420 So.2d 862, 863 (Fla.1982) (quoted with approval in Reed, 837 So.2d at 369 ). | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Young v. State
green
1 sentence2008Id. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Dowling v. State
green
1 sentence2006See also Palazzolo v. State, 754 So.2d 731 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)(instruction regarding essential element of sexual battery was fundamental error where instruction was erroneous and where there were misleading comments *1162 made during trial); Dowling v. State, 723 So.2d 307 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)(failure to give a complete or accurate instruction for the offense of false imprisonment constitutes fundamental error as it relates to an element of the charged offense). | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Reed v. State
green
1 sentence2002The district court held: "In this case, utilization of the doctrine of fundamental error is simply not justified in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt and lack of evidence that the inaccurate instruction was misused." Id. at 1198 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Lifka v. State
green
1 sentence1991We find Lifka v. State, 530 So.2d 371 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988) as persuasive authority for reversing one of the two lewd act convictions. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Change v. Mathies
neutral
1 sentence1989I didn’t want to risk my whole future just on an inaccurate test.” This case must be affirmed on the authority of Nelson v State, 508 So.2d 49 , and State v Hoch, 500 So.2d 597 . | 1 | 1989–1989 |
State v. Hoch
green
1 sentence1989I didn’t want to risk my whole future just on an inaccurate test.” This case must be affirmed on the authority of Nelson v State, 508 So.2d 49 , and State v Hoch, 500 So.2d 597 . | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.