Nicolas Dominique v. State of Florida
171 So. 3d 204
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Defendant shot and killed his ex-girlfriend’s new boyfriend after chasing him down the street and firing a gun; defendant was charged with first- and second-degree murder.
- At trial the jury was instructed on first-degree murder, second-degree murder, manslaughter by act (standard instruction requiring intent), and manslaughter by culpable negligence.
- The jury convicted the defendant of second-degree murder; defendant appealed arguing the manslaughter-by-act instruction was erroneous and constituted fundamental error under State v. Montgomery.
- The Fourth DCA originally affirmed the conviction in Dominique v. State, but the Florida Supreme Court quashed and remanded after its decision in Haygood v. State.
- On remand the parties disputed whether Haygood required reversal here: State argued this case differed because evidence could support culpable negligence; defendant argued the erroneous manslaughter-by-act instruction was fundamental error regardless.
- The Fourth DCA on remand held the erroneous manslaughter-by-act instruction was fundamental error because it pertained to a disputed element (state of mind) material to conviction, and reversed for a new trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Dominique) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether giving the standard manslaughter-by-act instruction (which requires intent) along with a manslaughter-by-culpable-negligence instruction is fundamental error when defendant was convicted of second-degree murder | Error is not fundamental because evidence here could support the culpable-negligence instruction, so the accompanying instruction cured any error | The erroneous manslaughter-by-act instruction was fundamental error because it misstates a disputed element (intent/state of mind) material to the jury’s decision | Reversed: the erroneous manslaughter-by-act instruction was fundamental error and requires a new trial |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Montgomery, 39 So. 3d 252 (Fla. 2010) (holding erroneous manslaughter-by-act instruction can be fundamental error)
- Haygood v. State, 109 So. 3d 735 (Fla. 2013) (holding the erroneous manslaughter-by-act instruction is fundamental error where it pertains to a disputed element material to conviction)
- Griffin v. State, 160 So. 3d 63 (Fla. 2015) (holding misidentification defense does not automatically concede other elements; erroneous manslaughter-by-act instruction can be fundamental error)
- Dominique v. State, 40 So. 3d 33 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (original appellate decision affirming conviction prior to Supreme Court remand)
- Simon v. State, 162 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (post-Haygood case noting no reasonable possibility for culpable negligence where evidence does not support it)
- Berube v. State, 149 So. 3d 1165 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (held manslaughter-by-culpable-negligence instruction could cure error when evidence could support it; contrasted by Fourth DCA here)