Dean Kenneth Rockmore, Petitioner v. State of Florida, Respondent — Polston, J., Concurring in Part and Dissenting…

Summary

Justice Polston, concurring in part and dissenting in part, would hold that Rockmore presented evidence supporting an abandonment defense to robbery and was entitled to a legally accurate jury instruction. The trial court improperly required proof that the victim was aware of the abandonment, and the State could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that this error did not contribute to the robbery conviction. Justice Pariente, concurring in part and dissenting in part, agrees that a new trial is required and would additionally establish that such an instruction is required whenever a defendant presents evidence supporting abandonment.