Fla. Stat, (1981) - Florida State University College of Law

WHEXFER THE
THE JUHI UPON THE LAW QF INDEPENDENT ACT UNDEX
THE F " Y - m R m N E PREVENED THE DEZWWANT
FRaM EFFECTIVELY DEFENDIPJT; AGAINST TIE CAPITAL
HQMICIDES IN mUNT3 I AND I11 OF THE INDI-,
AND P-D THE JURY FIMM CONSIDERING HIS
EF!FNSE TO THOSE: CHARGES, IN VIOLATION OF ?HE
D m ' S KCGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL BY AN IMPAF3TAL
JURY, AND DUE PRX!?BS aF LAW, AS GUARANTEED BY
THE FIFTH, SIx?H AND COURTEENTH AMENnMEcJTs TO
TiE U. S. CDNSTITUTICN AND A€U'IcLF, I, SECTIONS 9,
16, AND 22 OF TFE F'iXRIDA CONSTITUTION.
I1
WHETlER THE: TRZAL aUR" ERRED IN INSTRUCTING
THE THAT DURESS IS NOT A DEFENSE TO HQMICIDE,
WITHOUT REGARD TO wHEI€EB THE ACCUSm WAS AN AIDER
AND ABETTOR AS OPPOSED TO A PRINCIPAL, AND WITHOUT
REXXRD TO WHETHER HQMTCIDE WAS A PF?EMEDITATED
OR A ??ELONY MURDER, IN VIOLATION OF THE RImT OF AN
ACCXJSFD TO HAVE: TfdE 17uHll INSTRtJCTBD IN ACCORD WITH
HIS DEFENSE, AND HIS RIGarrTo 'IHE EZ'FlETIW ZSSISTANCE
OF CDUNSEL, AS GUARANTEED BY THE FIFTH, SIXTH, AND
F O I l R XW"E ~
TO THE U.S. CONSTImON AND
ARTICLE I, SECTIONS 9 AND 16 OF THE: F'LORIDA
CONSTITUTION.
I11
WHEXBER TFE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN AIXWING THE
PBECUTION To PRESENT, IN ITS CASE IN CHIEF
AND IN CmS-EXAMINATION OF THE D m ,
C0L;LATERAL CRIMINAL ACTS AND A?TAcKs ON THE
D m ' S WHICH WERE WHOiXY 1-
TD THE CRIMES CHARCED AND WHOSE SOW EFFECT WAS TO
DEDDNSTRATE A PROPENSITY TO m T CKIlG, IN
VIOLATION OF THEC D ' S
RIGIT TO A FAIR TRIAL
AND DUE PROCESS OF LAW, AS BY THE
FDURVENTH AMENaMENT To ?HE U.S. CONSTITUTION, AND
ARITCLE I, SECTION 9 OF THE FLORZDA COT\ZSTITUTION.
Page -23-