The Charges, Statutes - What Must Be Proven

Just Jayla said:

I think this would come down to them wanting to see her executed....Felony homicide does not always guarantee that the death penalty can be sought, see my link above to Wiki article. but a conviction on premeditated adds that factor of, well, premeditation, which is more offensive to a sentencing jury.

Also, I'm sure the attys here know more about the details that might be behind it.

ETA: But as I understand what Lin is posting, if they lose the argument on the first degree charges, they can fall back on felony murder per the case Lin cited. And possibly still get the DP.

Click to expand...

Just Jayla said:

I think this would come down to them wanting to see her executed....Felony homicide does not always guarantee that the death penalty can be sought, see my link above to Wiki article. but a conviction on premeditated adds that factor of, well, premeditation, which is more offensive to a sentencing jury.

Also, I'm sure the attys here know more about the details that might be behind it.

ETA: But as I understand what Lin is posting, if they lose the argument on the first degree charges, they can fall back on felony murder per the case Lin cited. And possibly still get the DP.

Click to expand...

JBean said:

But they weren't going for the DP initially.

Click to expand...

lin said:

Yes, thanks! You've got it but just to clarify so no one else misunderstands: They have to make the decision whether they want the jury instructed on felony murder when they're at the charge conference, discussing jury instructions. They can't wait until a jury fails to convict on one charge and then say, "Well how about this other one?"
By gaining an indictment on premeditated murder, the prosecution has in essence gained an indictment on all LIO's and also felony murder. There is no need to gain a separate indictment for any LIO or felony murder. However, had they indicted on felony murder instead of premeditated, they couldn't go the other way and ask for a conviction on premeditation instead of an underlying felony. That's why the charges are the way they are -- it's all inclusive this way.

Clearly the state believes they can prove premeditation but until this actually gets to trial and decisions are made on what evidence is admitted and which is deemed inadmissible for whatever reason, they can't be 100% sure what they'll be able to prove to the jury. They also can't 100% foresee what the defense may be able to do to explain away any evidence. Therefore, the indictment reading as it does not only says a lot about the evidence the state was able to present to the grand jury, (a murder 1 indictment without a body!!), but it is also the smart way to go, imo.

Click to expand...

Just Jayla said:

I wonder about that, did something change their minds that we do not know yet?

Click to expand...

JBean said:

But they weren't going for the DP initially.

Click to expand...

Themis said:

According to the Florida standard jury instructions I just posted on the guilty/not guilty thread, felony murder can be a lesser included offense of premeditated murder under Florida law.

Click to expand...

Themis said:

"Is it Felony murder? First degree murder? Capitol Murder? Murder? Homicide? Florida Murder? What exactly is it?"

I will try to give short, non-legal-jargon answers, if you promise that I can tweak later depending on how the discussion turns. :blowkiss:

It is first degree, premeditated murder. Felony murder is when the murder is committed during the course of a felony. A guy is robbing the 7-11 with a gun. During the course of the robbery (a felony) he shoots the store attendant, who dies. That's felony murder (aggravated by the use of a firearm). "Capital" murder is a murder that qualifies under a specific statute authorizing the death penalty. (I suppose a "capitol" murder would be one that took place in a state or federal capitol building? :waitasec Murder is a common name for an unlawful killing. An unlawful killing happens when there is not a legal justification for a killing. For example, when a surgeon operates and the patient dies due to the operation but it was not medical malpractice, just the frail condition of the patient, who consented to the surgery; then the death was covered as being legally justified -- trying to save the patient. There was intent to do that act knowing the patient might die, but the intent of the surgeon was to save the patient. Homicide means the killing of a human being. Sometimes it means the same as murder, but it is broader than that since murder requires specific intent. (That's a whole other conversation -- "specific intent.")

Bottom line, the charge is for premeditated murder also commonly known as first degree murder. It is a class of homicide. It is a capital offense because the death penalty is justified. To use your term, it is also a Florida murder, although that's not a real legal term at all. :blowkiss:

Click to expand...

Themis said:

Not a problem at all about capital vs capitol. :hand:

I think all the fuss about premeditated murder vs felony murder is based on peoples' different theories of the case. For example, if KC did use chloroform or dangerous drugs to knock Caylee out, that would be aggravated child abuse; a felony. It would be so grossly reckless that even if KC didn't intend to kill Caylee, but Caylee died as a result, it could be second degree murder or felony murder. Premeditated murder indicates the prosecution will have to prove that KC intended to kill Caylee by whatever methods she used to do it; ie smothering with duct tape.

Click to expand...

Themis said:

In some jurisdictions, a lesser included offense doesn't have to be written on a charge sheet. It is automatically included as a listed "lesser included offense" ("LIO"). There is already notice for that defense because it is listed as a lesser included offense. Therefore, the jury could be instructed to decide guilt on an LIO of premeditated murder.

The prosecutors would not have to amend the charge sheet to include an LIO. It is already there, included in the greater charge of premeditated murder.

The citation below is to an article about military law, it is generally applicable. I have not researched Florida state law on this topic.

In a contested criminal trial, the accused may in fact be on trial for more charges than appear on the charge sheet. This may not seem right, or logical, but the law provides that if the judge or the jury finds an accused not guilty of an offense he is charged with, the Court must then deliberate to determine if the accused is guilty of any applicable “lesser included offenses,” which we will refer to in this article as “LIO’s.”
http://www.militarylawyers.org/lesser-included-offense.htm

Click to expand...

Themis said:

A little more on "Lesser Included Offenses." The following is language from a Florida Supreme Court opinion, Williams v. Florida May 2007, SC06-594.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/floridastatecases/5_2007/sc06-594.pdf

"The Court recently explained the distinction between necessary and permissive lesser included offenses:​

Lesser included offenses fall into two categories: necessary and permissive. Necessarily lesser included offenses are those offenses in which the statutory elements of the lesser included offense are always subsumed within those of the charged offense. State v. Paul, 934 So. 2d 1167, 1176 (Fla. 2006). A permissive lesser included offense exists when "the two offenses appear to be separate [on the face of the statutes], but the facts alleged in the accusatory pleadings are such that the lesser [included] offense cannot help but be perpetrated once the greater offense has been." State v. Weller, 590 So. 2d 923, 925 n.2 (Fla. 1991).​

Sanders v. State, 944 So. 2d 203, 206 (Fla. 2006) (alteration in original)."

"An instruction on a permissive lesser included offense is appropriate only if the allegations of the greater offense contain all the elements of the lesser offense​

and the evidence at trial would support a verdict on the lesser offense. See Welsh, 850 So. 2d at 470. If an offense meets the criteria for an instruction and verdict choice as either a necessarily or permissive lesser included offense, the State may insist on its inclusion, even over defense objection. See Johnson v. State, 601 So. 2d 219, 220 (Fla. 1992) (holding that State has right to instruction on permissive lesser included offense over defense objection); Gallo v. State, 491 So. 2d 541, 543 (Fla. 1986) (holding that if State declines to consent to defense waiver of instruction on necessarily lesser included offense, waiver is ineffectual and instruction must be given), receded from on other grounds by Gould v. State, 577 So. 2d 1302, 1305 (Fla. 1991)." (Ibid.)

Basically, what this says is Florida does use LIOs, the statute doesn't necessarily contain all of the LIOs of a particular charge, the test is whether the elements for the LIO are also within the list of elements for the greater charge and the defense can't waive the prosecution's right to have the jury instructed on an LIO.

Click to expand...

Themis said:

If, after presentation of all the evidence, the evidence admitted supports a felony murder lesser included offense, the prosecution will make a choice of whether or not to request the instruction. The prosecution might not want to do that if they think the evidence supporting a premeditated murder charge is very clear. Juries like to compromise on things like this and giving them a compromise may or may not be the right legal tactic. The State's Attorney in Orange County will likely be the one to make this decision and not the lead prosecutor.

The standard of "if supported by the evidence" is not such a high bar to reach. It generally means that if there is evidence admitted upon which the jury could make that decision, then it meets the standard. The prosecutor, in making the request, and the judge, who decides whether or not to grant the request, do not themselves have to deliberate on the evidence to see if they would decide this at the beyond a reasonable doubt standard. In fact, the tendency is that if there is evidence that could support a felony murder charge, then they will let it go to the jury. "Support" here is a question of whether or not the evidence exists in the case and has been admitted. Even if that seems to be an unlikely result if the evidence exists in the case it can go to the jury. What we don't know at this point is if there will be evidence admitted in the case that the jury could use to support a felony murder conviction. A big part of that will depend on witness testimony and that hasn't happened yet.

Click to expand...

AZlawyer said:

OK, I just read Knight and some later cases interpreting it and my opinion is:

1) Casey clearly was not charged with felony murder;
2) Knight will allow the State to proceed on that theory at trial anyway;
3) The rule in Knight is very likely unconstitutional but obviously the Florida Supreme Court disagrees so this won't make much difference.

Click to expand...

AZlawyer said:

It's not because of which parts of the statute are listed first. The Florida Supreme Court says it is OK because felony murder is really just like premeditated murder except with a felony instead of premeditation....

If this makes no sense to you, it's not because you're not a lawyer.

Click to expand...

DotsEyes said:

In State v. Anderson, (FL January 19, 2003), the defendant argued that he was denied his rights when he had been charged with Capital Murder 1 but at the charge conference (when jury instructions are discussed amongst lawyers and judge and which happens immediately before the jury is instructed) the DA threw in Felony murder for kicks.

The FL Supreme Court ruled that the defendant had not shown any reason to recede from Knight, and found the defendant's argument to have no merit.

So, yes, the DA can wait until the charge conference to toss in felony murder and there is no prejudice to the defendant as it is a lesser included charge.

Things may have changed in 6 years, but I can't get the legal sites online here.

Click to expand...

AZlawyer said:

There have been no changes according to my cite-check.

Click to expand...

Themis said:

Just thinking here. I saw your earlier post regarding possible US Constitutional issues with Florida's history by case law of allowing felony murder instructions to be given even though it is not technically a lesser included offense of premeditated murder. I also see those issues. But, it seems that this is allowed because the independent felony, like felony aggravated child abuse or one of the other listed felonies, is also on the charge sheet. Therefore, this in combination with the premeditated murder charge does appear that it would take care of those US Constitutional concerns of due process (including lack of sufficient notice and right to trial on that charge and its elements) and the related concerns of right to counsel (who has to have a chance to be competent and prepared). :waitasec: So, maybe if it is limited to when both premeditated murder and the specific felony are both on the same charge sheet, it could pass constitutional muster. Other than that, it would appear there could be problems.

Click to expand...

impatientredhead said:

This issue has gone to the Florida Supreme court several times and the convictions have been upheld as long as the aggravating felony was on the indictment. In the cases where it was not on the indictment they did not allow the alternative finding of felony murder. In the cases where it was included the court found (repeatedly) that the defendant's ability to defend themselves was not impeded and the conviction stood.

The other issue that came up in Florida was that the jury did not have to a cohesive group when it came to felony murder or premeditated murder. The jury could be completely split on that issue and still come back with a capital conviction. That has been challenged to the Florida Supreme Courts repeatedly and the convictions have been upheld on that issue.

Click to expand...

JBean said:

But they weren't going for the DP initially.

Click to expand...

JBean said:

Snip....
ETA: also can someone post the actual charges that she faces now? Just the ones regarding caylee, not the check fraud and all that.
TIA.

Click to expand...

JBean said:

Just to clarify it is important to note that first degree felony murder is not considered a lesser charge to premediated murder. I would then think that the state would have to ask for it specifically to be considered by the jury.
I wonder why the state did not charge her with it specifically. It just seems like an easier charge to prove.

ETA: also can someone post the actual charges that she faces now? Just the ones regarding caylee, not the check fraud and all that.
TIA.

Click to expand...

JBean said:

But they weren't going for the DP initially.

Click to expand...

Wudge said:

The evidence and circumstances in this case do not lend themselves to simultaneous charges of both premeditated murder and first-degree felony murder. Given the evidence in this case and the circumstances that we know of, prosecutors would need to offer two incongruent thoeries to the jury; i.e., prosecutors would offer one theory would to the jury for the premeditated murder charge and also offer another and much different theory to the jury for a first-degree, felony murder charge.

By offering the jury two entirely different theories, prosecutors would be arguing against themselves by necessarily admitting they don't know what transpired in a large way -- prosecutors don't know what transpired but are not dumb enough to necessarily admit that truth by presenting two incongruent theories to the jury.

A case where the evidence might well provide for a simultaneous murder one charge and a felony murder charge would be if a killing occurred in a robbery and all the evidence pointed to but one clear suspect and/or that person admitted to the robbery. In such a case, a simultaneous murder one charge and a first-degree felony murder charge would simply allow the jury to decide if the victim was killed to facilitate the robbery or if the robbery was underway and the victim resisted or tried to intervene and was killed as a result.

HTH

Click to expand...

Wudge said:

The evidence and circumstances in this case do not lend themselves to simultaneous charges of both premeditated murder and first-degree felony murder. Given the evidence in this case and the circumstances that we know of, prosecutors would need to offer two incongruent thoeries to the jury; i.e., prosecutors would offer one theory would to the jury for the premeditated murder charge and also offer another and much different theory to the jury for a first-degree, felony murder charge.

By offering the jury two entirely different theories, prosecutors would be arguing against themselves by necessarily admitting they don't know what transpired in a large way -- prosecutors don't know what transpired but are not dumb enough to necessarily admit that truth by presenting two incongruent theories to the jury.

A case where the evidence might well provide for a simultaneous murder one charge and a felony murder charge would be if a killing occurred in a robbery and all the evidence pointed to but one clear suspect and/or that person admitted to the robbery. In such a case, a simultaneous murder one charge and a first-degree felony murder charge would simply allow the jury to decide if the victim was killed to facilitate the robbery or if the robbery was underway and the victim resisted or tried to intervene and was killed as a result.

HTH

Click to expand...