Williams v. State
123 So. 3d 23
Fla.2013Background
- Florida Supreme Court reviews Fourth District Williams v. State, certified questions of public importance regarding attempted manslaughter instructions.
- Williams was charged with attempted first-degree murder for stabbing his ex-girlfriend in 2006, with a baby present.
- Trial court gave the standard jury instruction for attempted manslaughter by act; Williams was convicted of attempted second-degree murder among other counts.
- Williams argued the instruction was fundamental error, citing Montgomery v. State on manslaughter by act.
- Montgomery held the standard manslaughter by act instruction was fundamental error when applied to a crime one step removed.
- Court addresses whether attempted manslaughter by act remains a viable offense post-Montgomery and whether the standard instruction is fundamental error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the standard attempted manslaughter by act instruction fundamental error? | Williams: instruction added an intent-to-kill element. | State: no fundamental error since disputed element not clarified in error. | Yes; instruction constitutes fundamental error. |
| Does attempted manslaughter remain a viable offense after Montgomery? | Williams: no viable offense given improper instruction. | State: remains a cognizable offense. | Yes; attempted manslaughter remains viable. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Montgomery, 39 So.3d 252 (Fla.2010) (standard instruction for manslaughter by act is fundamental error when one-step-removed offense is charged)
- Lamb v. State, 18 So.3d 734 (Fla.1st DCA 2009) (agrees that attempted manslaughter by act instruction is fundamental error)
- Taylor v. State, 444 So.2d 931 (Fla.1983) (antecedent: attempted manslaughter by act cognizable; no culpable negligence allowed)
- Gonzalez v. State, 40 So.3d 60 (Fla.2d DCA 2010) (referenced in discussion of district court consistency)
- Garzon v. State, 980 So.2d 1038 (Fla.2008) (fundamental error depends on whether instruction pertains to essential element)
- Reed v. State, 837 So.2d 366 (Fla.2002) (foundation for fundamental error when error affects convicting considerations)
- Bonilla v. State, 75 So.3d 233 (Fla.2011) (reconfirms Montgomery holding)