Cunningham v. State
74 So. 3d 568
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Milagro Cunningham was convicted by a jury of attempted second-degree murder, kidnapping a child under thirteen, three counts of sexual battery on a child under twelve, and aggravated child abuse;
- The jury rejected Cunningham's insanity defense;
- Cunningham received fifteen years for count I, life for counts II–V, and thirty years for count VI;
- On appeal, Cunningham challenges evidentiary rulings, suppression of statements, prosecutorial comments, defense final argument, and a jury instruction related to Montgomery;
- The court notes a conflict among district courts regarding Montgomery and affirms the issue but remits clarification to higher courts;
- The court reverses the life sentences for counts II–V under Graham v. Florida and remands for resentencing
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Evidentiary ruling on neuropsychologist evidence | Cunningham argues admissibility of neuropsychologist testimony | State contends ruling was proper | Affirmed; ruling sustained |
| Denial of motion to suppress statements to police | Cunningham contends statements were involuntary | State contends statements were voluntary and properly obtained | Affirmed; suppression denial sustained |
| Prosecutor's closing arguments | Cunningham alleges improper prosecutor comments | State maintains comments were proper | Affirmed; prosecutorial remarks deemed permissible |
| Defense counsel's final argument | Cunningham claims denial of right to present final argument | State contends court properly limited argument | Affirmed; final argument restriction upheld |
| Jury instruction for lesser-included offense given Montgomery framework | Cunningham challenges standard manslaughter instruction following Montgomery | State asserts standard instruction applies | Affirmed in part; Williams-based reasoning acknowledged; instruction retained; remand noted |
Key Cases Cited
- Montgomery v. State, 70 So. 3d 603 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (held intent to kill not an element of manslaughter; standard instruction may mislead jurors)
- Montgomery v. State (aff’d), 39 So. 3d 252 (Fla.2010) (supreme court upheld Montgomery reasoning)
- Williams v. State, 40 So. 3d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (refused to extend Montgomery to attempted first-degree murder vs. second-degree conviction; issue discussed on review)
- Fenster v. State, 61 So. 3d 465 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) ( discusses related issue in post-Montgomery landscape)
- Sessions v. State, 59 So. 3d 1208 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) ( additional authority cited on manslaughter instruction)
- Mansfield v. State, 41 So. 3d 410 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) ( supportive discussion on instructional standards)
- Graham v. Florida, 130 S. Ct. 2011 (U.S.) (juvenile life without parole for non-homicide offenses barred; affects counts II–V here)
- McCullum v. State, 60 So. 3d 502 (Fla. 1st DCA) (held attempted second-degree murder is nonhomicide under Graham)
- Manuel v. State, 48 So. 3d 94 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (explains Graham applicability to nonhomicide offenses)