Timmons v. State

ERVIN, Chief Judge.

Appellants contend, inter alia, that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury that the state was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that appellants were not entrapped as their affirmative defense suggested. The record shows that the trial court gave standard jury instructions on entrapment, reasonable doubt, the state’s burden of proof and the fact that defendants were not required to prove anything. As this court recently recognized in Rotenberry v. State, 429 So.2d 378 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (discretionary review accepted and currently pend*1049ing), the…