Case Title: Zeigler v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: SC09-2082

State: florida

Court: Florida Supreme Court

Date: 2011-10-27T00:00:00Z

Document:
Supreme Court of Florida 
 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC09-2082 
____________ 
 
MERLE FRANCES ZEIGLER,  
Petitioner, 
 
vs. 
 
STATE OF FLORIDA,  
Respondent. 
 
[October 27, 2011] 
 
LABARGA, J. 
This case is before the Court for review of the decision of the Second 
District Court of Appeal in Zeigler v. State, 18 So. 3d 1239 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009).  
The district court certified that its decision is in direct conflict with the decision of 
the First District Court of Appeal in Montgomery v. State, 34 Fla. L. Weekly D360 
(Fla. 1st DCA 2009).  We have jurisdiction.  See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.   
We previously accepted jurisdiction in Montgomery and stayed proceedings 
in Zeigler pending disposition of Montgomery.  In State v. Montgomery, 39 So. 3d 
252 (Fla. 2010), we held that because defendant Montgomery, who was convicted 
of second-degree murder, was entitled to an accurate jury instruction on the 
 
- 2 - 
necessarily lesser included offense of manslaughter by act, the use of the then-
standard jury instruction on manslaughter by act constituted fundamental reversible 
error in his case because it erroneously required the jury to find that the defendant 
intentionally caused the death of the victim.  We then affirmed the district court’s 
reversal of Montgomery’s conviction for second-degree murder.  We subsequently 
issued an order in Zeigler directing the State to show cause why we should not 
accept jurisdiction, summarily quash the decision under review, and remand for 
reconsideration in light of our decision in Montgomery.   
Upon review of the parties’ responses and the decision below, we conclude 
that the district court’s reasoning in Zeigler is inconsistent with our reasoning in 
Montgomery and our conclusion that the use of the erroneous manslaughter by act 
instruction constituted fundamental error that required reversal of Montgomery’s 
conviction for second-degree murder.  Accordingly, we accept jurisdiction and 
grant the petition for review.  The decision below is quashed, and this matter is 
remanded to the Second District Court of Appeal for reconsideration upon 
application of our decision in Montgomery. 
It is so ordered. 
CANADY, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, POLSTON, and PERRY, JJ., 
concur. 
 
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND 
IF FILED, DETERMINED. 
 
 
- 3 - 
 
Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal - Certified 
Direct Conflict of Decisions 
 
 
Second District - Case No. 2D07-5300 
 
 
(Manatee County) 
 
Joseph Cameron Bodiford of Bodiford Law, P.A., Tampa, Florida, 
 
 
for Petitioner 
 
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, and Marilyn Muir 
Beccue, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, Florida, 
 
 
for Respondent