Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Yousel L. Rivera, Appellant, v. State of Florida, Appellee.
Yousel L. Rivera appeals his conviction and sentence for attempted first-degree premeditated murder of a law enforcement officer with a firearm.1 He raises numerous issues on appeal, all of which we find unavailing. Specifically, we find: 1) evidence of his possession of marijuana during the shooting was admissible because it was inextricably intertwined with the charged offense; 2) evidence of his “abnormal brain pathology” and prior head injuries was inadmissible to show he did not act with the requisite intent, see, e.g., Evans v. State, 946 So. 2d 1, 10–11 (Fla. 2006), Reaves v. State, 639 So. 2d 1, 4 (Fla. 1994), and Bunney v. State, 603 So. 2d 1270, 1272–73 (Fla. 1992); 3) the bullet fragment and test-fired casings were properly admitted because there was no evidence of tampering and, even if that were not the case, the admission of such evidence was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt; 4) no Brady 2 violation occurred because the parties had equal access to the information in question and there was no evidence the State willfully or inadvertently suppressed the evidence, see, e.g., Pagan v. State, 29 So. 3d 938, 946 (Fla. 2009) and Provenzano v. State, 616 So. 2d 428, 430 (Fla. 1993); 5) there was sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the shooting was premeditated; 6) the record supported the inclusion of a voluntary intoxication instruction, see Patrick v. State, 104 So. 3d 1046, 1058 (Fla. 2012) and Gibbs v. State, 904 So. 2d 432, 437 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); 7) the State's actions during closing arguments were not improper; and 8) the imposition of a life sentence was not unconstitutional, see, e.g., Barwick v. State, 361 So. 3d 785, 794 (Fla. 2023) and Boesch v. State, 368 So. 3d 454, 455–56 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023).
AFFIRMED.
FOOTNOTES
1. This is Mr. Rivera's second appeal. Rivera v. State, 235 So. 3d 983 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017).
2. Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963).
PER CURIAM.
STARGEL, NARDELLA and SMITH, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: Case No. 6D2024-0735
Decided: July 11, 2025
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Sixth District.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)