Sheridan Landell Veney v. State of Florida, 217 So. 3d 1189

Sheridan Veney and his wife Lisa Marie separated after 20+ years of marriage but interacted socially afterward.
After a brief encounter at a mall, an interaction at a restaurant led to Lisa insulting Sheridan; he then followed her outside and shot her five times, killing her.
Sheridan admitted the shooting but claimed it was unplanned and the result of an immediate loss of control; his counsel argued for manslaughter.
The jury convicted Sheridan of first-degree murder, finding premeditation; he received a life sentence.
On appeal, Sheridan challenged only the sufficiency of the evidence of premeditation, asking for reduction to second-degree murder.
The district court reviewed the denial of the judgment of acquittal de novo and considered circumstantial evidence the jury relied on.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence was sufficient to prove premeditation for first-degree murder	State: circumstantial evidence (weapon possession, statements, pursuit, pauses between shots) supported premeditation	Veney: the killing was instantaneous, unplanned, an impulsive overreaction (manslaughter)	Affirmed conviction for first-degree murder; evidence supported premeditation

Pagan v. State, 830 So. 2d 792 (2002) (standard of review for motion for judgment of acquittal)
DeAngelo v. State, 616 So. 2d 440 (1993) (premeditation can form in a moment; requires consciousness of act and probable result)
Asay v. State, 580 So. 2d 610 (1991) (premeditation instruction and related standards)
Hutchinson v. State, 882 So. 2d 943 (2004) (circumstantial factors can establish premeditation)
Deparvine v. State, 995 So. 2d 351 (2008) (noted as abrogating some aspects of other precedents on different grounds)
Floyd v. State, 850 So. 2d 383 (2002) (threats, preparation, and prolonged argument support premeditation finding)
Fennell v. State, 959 So. 2d 810 (2007) (weapon use and prior threats can support premeditation)