From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bernhardt v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Oct 1, 1999
741 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

Summary

holding that allegation that jury received erroneous written instruction could form basis for post-conviction relief even though correct instruction was read to the jury

Summary of this case from Concepcion v. State

Opinion

No. 97-04438.

Opinion filed October 1, 1999.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Anthony Rondolino, Judge.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Allyn Giambalvo, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Gary Wayne Bernhardt, pro se.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Deborah F. Hogge, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.


Gary Bernhardt appeals his conviction and sentence for attempted burglary of a dwelling. We affirm notwithstanding the fact that the record contains an erroneous written jury instruction.

Mr. Bernhardt was charged with burglary of a dwelling. The jury found him guilty of the lesser offense of attempted burglary. The transcript of the trial reflects that the trial court provided a correct burglary instruction when the judge read the instructions to the jury. The written instructions in the record, however, incorrectly state that, to find him guilty of burglary, the jury must find that "at the time of entering the structure Gary Bernhardt had a fully-formed conscious intent to commit the offense of burglary in that structure." (Emphasis added.) If this instruction was given to the jury, precedent suggests that the error is fundamental. See Davis v. State, 24 Fla. L. Weekly D1156 (Fla. 4th DCA May 12, 1999); Viveros v. State, 699 So.2d 822 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997).

Our reading of the transcript strongly suggests that the written instructions were never given to the jury. Nevertheless, we are unable to determine that the jury did not receive these incorrect instructions. If Mr. Bernhardt can allege under oath that the erroneous written instructions were in fact given to the jury, he may seek timely postconviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.

Affirmed.

ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and SALCINES, J., and DANAHY, PAUL W., (SENIOR) JUDGE, Concur.


Summaries of

Bernhardt v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Oct 1, 1999
741 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

holding that allegation that jury received erroneous written instruction could form basis for post-conviction relief even though correct instruction was read to the jury

Summary of this case from Concepcion v. State
Case details for

Bernhardt v. State

Case Details

Full title:GARY WAYNE BERNHARDT, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Oct 1, 1999

Citations

741 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

Citing Cases

Williams v. Crosby

This Court finds that Defendant is not entitled to relief. As brought out at the evidentiary hearing, the law…

Valentine v. State

However, the correction was never brought to the jury's attention. Cf. Bernhardt v. State, 741 So.2d 1230…