From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lamb v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Sep 4, 1996
679 So. 2d 59 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

Opinion

No. 95-1534.

September 4, 1996.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County, Sheldon Schapiro, J.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Paul E. Petillo, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Elliot B. Kula, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.


We reverse Appellant's robbery conviction and remand for a new trial on grounds that the jury should have been instructed on the lesser-included offense of resisting a merchant. Pursuant to the 1992 amendment of section 812.015(6), Florida Statutes, the charge of resisting a merchant is a lesser-included offense of robbery. Because the facts adduced at trial supported this lesser charge, it was error for the trial court to deny Appellant's request. Sanders v. State, 654 So.2d 1279 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995).

GLICKSTEIN, STONE and GROSS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Lamb v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Sep 4, 1996
679 So. 2d 59 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)
Case details for

Lamb v. State

Case Details

Full title:FRED LAMB, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Sep 4, 1996

Citations

679 So. 2d 59 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

Citing Cases

Maldanado v. State

We reverse defendant's robbery conviction, and remand for a new trial because the jury should have been…