Stanley v. State, 57 So. 3d 944

Defendant Prentice Stanley was convicted of first degree murder and leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death and sentenced to life in prison.
The victim, Mah-moud Mansour, was the general manager of a Ft. Lauderdale clothing manufacturer; he was run over by a truck in the company parking lot.
The truck used was recently reported stolen; fingerprints were found on the truck; a friend testified Stanley confessed to the crime.
The grand jury indicted Stanley for first degree murder and leaving the scene of an accident; the indictment referenced felony murder and the evidence supported multiple theories.
On appeal, Stanley challenged jury instructions, admission of 911 recordings and autopsy photos, and his double jeopardy claim; the court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Indictment vs. jury instruction theories	State argues indictment allowed felony murder theory; instructions permitted premeditation or felony murder.	Stanley contends constructive amendment of indictment by allowing a theory not charged.	No constructive amendment; conviction legal under theories charged or implied by indictment.
Admission of 911 calls as hearsay	State sought to admit 911 tapes as excited utterances/present sense impressions.	Stanley objects to hearsay unless within exceptions.	911 calls properly admitted as excited utterances; non-testimonial, properly authenticated.
Autopsy photographs admissibility	Photos aid medical examiner in explaining injuries and cause of death; relevant to intent.	Photos are prejudicial and inflaming without added probative value.	Seventeen autopsy photos admissible; relevant to explain injuries and manner of death; not unduly prejudicial.
Double jeopardy	Convictions on both counts do not violate Double Jeopardy since leaving scene is a distinct offense post-death.	Two homicide convictions for a single death may violate Blockburger and double jeopardy.	Convictions do not violate double jeopardy; one is leaving-the-scene offense, distinct from murder.

O'Callaghan v. State, 429 So.2d 691 (Fla. 1983) ( State may prosecute felony murder under premeditated murder indictment)
State v. Pinder, 375 So.2d 836 (Fla. 1979) (indictment charging premeditated murder allows felony-murder theory)
Crain v. State, 894 So.2d 59 (Fla.2004) (constructive amendment doctrine; due process concerns)
Barron v. State, 990 So.2d 1098 (Fla.3d DCA 2007) (911 calls classified as excited utterances; non-testimonial)
Barron v. State, 990 So.2d 1098 (Fla.3d DCA 2007) (double jeopardy and admissibility of autopsy photos (implicit reference))
Barrios-Perez v. United States, 317 F.3d 777 (8th Cir. 2003) (constructive amendment of charging document)
Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (U.S. 1932) (rule of statutory offenses; if no clear multiple judgment, use Blockburger test)