Miller v. Florida
Florida District Court of Appeal
805 So.2d 885 (2001)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
John Miller (defendant) unsuccessfully sought treatment for his heroin addiction at a methadone clinic. Miller then began a new treatment at a different clinic, where, while sedated, the clinic administered intense doses of several toxic drugs so to expedite the effects of withdrawal. After 27 hours of treatment, the clinic released Miller from the clinic while he was still heavily sedated. Within three hours of his release, Miller returned to the methadone clinic and found it closed for the day. Miller used a handgun to shoot the lock off the gate and entered the clinic’s grounds. Miller walked around the clinic building, shooting at it several times. Miller then broke a window and climbed inside. Subsequently, Miller surrendered to the police. The State of Florida (plaintiff) charged Miller with shooting into a building, burglary with a firearm, and discharging a firearm in public. At trial, Miller raised defenses of insanity and involuntary intoxication. At the end of the trial, Miller proposed a jury instruction on involuntary intoxication. The trial court rejected Miller’s instruction and, instead, gave an instruction of its own that failed to appropriately state the law. The jury convicted Miller, and he appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Davis, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
