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.
Roderick GRANDISON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Roderick A. Grandison appeals his conviction of attempted second degree murder, arguing that the trial court erred in instructing the jury that the lesser included offense of attempted manslaughter by act included an intent to kill element. On the authority of Williams v. State, 123 So.3d 23 (Fla.2013), we hold that it was fundamental error for the trial court to instruct the jury that the lesser included offense of attempted manslaughter by act included an intent to kill element where Grandison was convicted of an offense not more than one step removed from attempted manslaughter. Accordingly, we reverse his conviction and sentence and remand for a new trial.
Grandison was charged with the attempted first degree murder of his wife. At trial, the court gave the instruction that “[t]o prove the crime of attempted voluntary manslaughter, the State [ ] must prove the following element beyond a reasonable doubt: Roderick A. Grandison committed an act which was intended to cause the death of Sheila Grandison ․“ (emphasis added). Grandison did not object to the instruction. He was subsequently convicted of attempted second degree murder, a lesser included offense.
In Williams, the Florida Supreme Court held that the jury instruction on attempted manslaughter by act, which requires the jury to find that the defendant committed an act intended to cause death, constitutes fundamental error where the defendant is convicted of an offense no more than one step removed from attempted manslaughter. Id. at 24.
As the state concedes, Williams controls in this case. Since Grandison was convicted of an offense not more than one step removed from attempted manslaughter, the jury instruction was fundamental error.
Reversed and Remanded.
PER CURIAM.
DAMOORGIAN, C.J., GROSS and Taylor, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. 4D10–2510.
Decided: January 08, 2014
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)