Case ID: so3d_75/html/0862-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. WOLF, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Courtland Labrian HINES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 1D10-6186.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
    Dec. 20, 2011.
    
      Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Glen P. Gifford, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
    Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Samuel A. Perrone, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

HAWKES and ROBERTS, JJ„ concur; WOLF, J., concurs with opinion.

WOLF, J.,

Concurring.

In the instant case, before releasing the jury for deliberations, the trial court stated:

Ladies and gentlemen, we’re going to go ahead in a moment and let y’all go back and start deliberating. You will get the exhibits, you will get a verdict form, and you will take your jury instructions with you.
Now, I think sometimes jurors have questions for me, but the first thing that you should do if you think you have a question is stop and reread those jury instructions, because I really am giving you everything that you need to know to make your decision.

(Emphasis added). This preemptive instruction, especially the underlined language, is problematic. It may have a chilling effect on the exercise of the jury’s power to request clarification, further instructions, or a review of testimony. This language, however, does not rise to the level of fundamental error; therefore, I concur.