Moore v. State
57 So. 3d 240
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2011Background
- Baron Moore was convicted of second-degree murder of Keith Culbertson and sentenced to life imprisonment.
- Culbertson was last seen August 2, 2003 getting into his Toyota 4Runner, which later yielded Scooby-Doo items.
- Culbertson's blood was found on the vehicle’s front seat; his decomposed body was discovered in a field after a tip.
- A search at Moore's home uncovered Scooby-Doo items taken from Culbertson's 4Runner.
- Medical examiner testified Culbertson was shot three times in the face and once in the neck; skull photo admitted over objection.
- Evidence linked Moore to the murder through multiple witnesses and investigative leads; the defense sought to limit sexual-relationship inferences, and the jury was instructed on manslaughter theories.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of skull photo admissibility | Moore: photo irrelevant and prejudicial. | State: photo probative of manner and intent. | Photo admissible; probative and not unduly prejudicial. |
| Prosecutor's closing remark and mistrial | Prosecutor's comment suggested uncharged sexual activity. | No error; comment supported by evidence. | No abuse of discretion; no mistrial required. |
| Fundamental error from manslaughter instruction versus Montgomery | Instruction flawed compared to Montgomery standard. | No fundamental error because jury received applicable instruction and simultaneuous culpable-negligence option. | No fundamental error; instruction aligned with post-Montgomery standards and dual manslaughter instructions. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hicks v. State, 41 So.3d 327 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (malice-related element in second-degree murder)
- Light v. State, 841 So.2d 623 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (definition of malice in second-degree murder)
- Czubak v. State, 570 So.2d 925 (Fla. 1990) (admission of photos must be relevant and not unduly shocking)
- Almeida v. State, 748 So.2d 922 (Fla.1999) (relevance of photographs to disputed issues)
- Breedlove v. State, 413 So.2d 1 (Fla.1982) (counsel can argue all legitimate inferences)
- Cubelo v. State, 41 So.3d 263 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (Montgomery post-decision; no fundamental error when both manslaughter theories instruction given)
- Daniels v. State, 46 So.3d 630 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (no fundamental error with dual manslaughter instructions)
- Guerra v. State, 44 So.3d 226 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (distinguishing Montgomery; dual manslaughter instructions present)
- Salonko v. State, 42 So.3d 801 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (Montgomery comparison; dual manslaughter instructions)
- Montgomery, 39 So.3d 252 (Fla.2010) (standard for manslaughter instruction post-Montgomery)