jury is reversible error (Florida) · Go Syfert
← Florida issues

jury is reversible error in Florida

7 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1969–2012 0 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.

Followed or applied (5)

CaseFollowedCited
Doyle v. Stategreen
fladistctapp · 1986 · cited in 3 Florida opinions naming this issue, 1994–2003
2 sentences

2003While it is preferable that a standard jury instruction is given if it adequately explains the law, see, e.g., McGuire v. State, 639 So.2d 1043, 1047 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994), and giving a non-standard instruction that misleads the jury is reversible error, see, e.g., Doyle v. State, 483 So.2d 89, 90 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986), the trial court's decision to give a particular instruction will not be reversed "unless the error complained of resulted in a miscarriage of justice, or where the instruction or failure to give a requested instruction was reasonably calculated to confuse or mislead the jury." Reyk

2001See, e.g., Doyle v. State, 483 So.2d 89, 90 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986).

23
McGuire v. Stategreen
fladistctapp · 1994 · cited in 2 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2001–2003
2 sentences

2003While it is preferable that a standard jury instruction is given if it adequately explains the law, see, e.g., McGuire v. State, 639 So.2d 1043, 1047 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994), and giving a non-standard instruction that misleads the jury is reversible error, see, e.g., Doyle v. State, 483 So.2d 89, 90 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986), the trial court's decision to give a particular instruction will not be reversed "unless the error complained of resulted in a miscarriage of justice, or where the instruction or failure to give a requested instruction was reasonably calculated to confuse or mislead the jury." Reyk

2001We also note, however, that it is preferable that a standard jury instruction be given if it adequately explains the law, see, e.g., McGuire v. State, 639 So.2d 1043, 1047 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994), and giving a non-standard instruction that misleads the jury is reversible error.

22
Carpenter v. Stategreen
fla · 2001 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
1 sentence

2012See Carpenter v. State, 785 So.2d 1182, 1200 (Fla.2001) (holding that “it is preferable that a standard jury instruction be given if it adequately explains the law, and giving a non-standard instruction that misleads the jury is reversible error”) (citations omitted).

11
Reyka v. Halifax Hosp. Dist.green
fladistctapp · 1995 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003
1 sentence

2003Dist., 657 So.2d 967, 969 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995).

11
Perriman v. Stategreen
fla · 1999 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2001–2001
1 sentence

2001In Perriman v. State 731 So.2d 1243, 1246-1248 (Fla.1999), the Supreme Court stated: Where a jury is confused concerning a point of law, the court must exercise sound discretion.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Abreau green
fla · 1978
1 sentence

1985It is appellant's contention that resisting arrest without violence is a lesser included offense of resisting arrest with violence, only one step removed, and the failure to so instruct the jury is reversible error, per se, relying on State v. Abreau, 363 So.2d 1063 (Fla. 1978).

11985–1985
Dixon v. State green
fla · 1931
2 sentences

1969In Dixon v. State, 1931, 101 Fla. 840 , 132 So. 684 , relied upon by appellant, this court said that “ * * * if the facts constituting the reasonable grounds for belief of commission of felony upon which the arrest is made are in dispute, the question is for the jury under proper instructions; but if there is no dispute in the testimony about such facts, the question is for the court.” In that case the defendant police officers were charged with culpable negligence and aggravated assault arising out of their shooting into an automobile thought to have been stolen in order to apprehend the susp

1969In Dixon v. State, 1931, 101 Fla. 840 , 132 So. 684 , relied upon by appellant, this court said that “ * * * if the facts constituting the reasonable grounds for belief of commission of felony upon which the arrest is made are in dispute, the question is for the jury under proper instructions; but if there is no dispute in the testimony about such facts, the question is for the court.” In that case the defendant police officers were charged with culpable negligence and aggravated assault arising out of their shooting into an automobile thought to have been stolen in order to apprehend the susp

11969–1969

Where else courts name it

NM 17 (2005–2025) GA 10 (1916–2023) CA 8 (1965–2023) TX 8 (1922–2004) IL 8 (2003–2014) FL 7 (1969–2012) MO 7 (1928–2017) IN 7 (1975–2002) IA 3 (1974–2001) TN 3 (1997–2001) MN 2 (1985–2006) SC 2 (1931–1985) AR 2 (1963–1989) AZ 2 (1979–2020) AL 2 (1967–1973) WA 2 (1986–2019) ID 2 (1998–2004) MS 2 (1983–2024) MI 2 (1955–1971)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check