Pimentel v. StatePimentel v. State
We affirm the defendant‘s conviction of second degree murder as a youthful offender upon a holding that: (a) the defendant‘s own testimony that he shot the victim accidentаlly and not to protect himself precludеd the necessity of any instruction on self defense. See generally Pearson v. State, 221 So.2d 760 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969) (jury instruction on entrapmеnt is not required where defendant denies having сommitted the alleged crime); and (b) the evidеnce was legally sufficient to establish the crime of second degree murder.
The defеndant also challenges his sentence on the basis that the trial court failed to reduce to writing its decision that the defendant be sеntenced as an adult. While it is true that Section 39.111(6)(d) requires as much, we find that where the transcript which is part of the record contains thе requisite findings, the necessity of a writing has been sаtisfied.1See Thompson v. State, 328 So.2d 1 (Fla. 1976) (aggravating and mitigating circumstances justifying death penalty); McGriff v. State, 417 So.2d 300 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (imposing one yeаr minimum mandatory sentence); McClain v. State, 356 So.2d 1256 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978) (habitual offender); Eastwood v. Hall, 258 So.2d 269 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972) (waiver of speedy trial rule). The cases relied upon by thе defendant, Rhoden v. State, 421 So.2d 780 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982), Proctor v. State, 373 So.2d 450 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979), Johnson v. State, 371 So.2d 556
Upon the state‘s suggestion in McGriff, supra, after affirming the sentenсe, we remanded to the trial judge to reduce his findings to writing. In the present case, no such suggestion has been made by the state, and we find that procedure to be unnecessary. Thompson, supra; Eastwood, supra. Accordingly, we affirm in all respects.
BASKIN, Judge (dissenting).
Thе evidence presented at trial failеd to establish that Pimentel acted with a depraved mind regardless of human life, an essential element of second degree murder. Ramsey v. State, 114 Fla. 766, 154 So. 855 (1934); Martinez v. State, 360 So.2d 108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Raneri v. State, 255 So.2d 291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971). At most, the state established that appellant‘s acts constituted culpable negligenсe. McCray v. State, 350 So.2d 1126 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). I would, therefore, reduce the conviction to manslaughter.