Case ID: so2d_610/html/0648-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ariel PEREZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 92-233.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Dec. 15, 1992.
    Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Marti Rothenberg, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Joan L. Greenberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
    Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BARKDULL and LEVY, JJ.
   SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

At the retrial required by our reversal of his previous conviction in Perez v. State, 578 So.2d 510 (Fla. 3d DCA1991), the defendant was again found guilty of attempted second degree murder with a firearm. Unfortunately, we are again compelled to reverse because, although the jury charge initially defined excusable and justifiable homicide as part of the homicide instructions, it, obviously inadvertently, did not also specifically exclude justifiable and excusable homicide from the definition of the lesser included offense of manslaughter. Under Miller v. State, 573 So.2d 337 (Fla.1991) and Rojas v. State, 552 So.2d 914 (Fla.1989), the omission presents fundamental error, requiring a new trial although there was no objection below. Because the record does not sustain the state’s contention that the omission was affirmatively agreed to or invited by defense counsel, compare Armstrong v. State, 579 So.2d 734 (Fla.1991), the judgment is therefore reversed for a new trial.

Reversed and remanded.