Title: Burgos, Jr. v. State
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: SC10-78
State: Florida
Issuer: Florida Supreme Court
Date: October 27, 2011

Supreme Court of Florida 
 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC10-78 
____________ 
 
CATALINO BURGOS, JR.,  
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 Burgos v. State, 32 So. 3d 130 (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 Burgos 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 Burgos 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 reliance upon Zeigler v. State, 18 So. 3d 1239 (Fla. 2d DCA 
2009), 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. 2D08-2895 
 
 
(Hillsborough County) 
 
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Timothy J. Ferreri, Assistant Public 
Defender, Tenth Judicial Circuit, Bartow, Florida, 
 
 
for Petitioner 
 
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, Robert J. Krauss, Bureau 
Chief, and Diana K. Bock, Assistant Attorneys General, Tampa, Florida, 
 
 
for Respondent