Example of Failure to Instruct on Lesser-Included Offense

In State v. Abreau, 363 So. 2d 1063, 1064 (Fla. 1978), the Court held that if a defendant is charged with offense "A" of which "B" is the next immediate lesser-included offense (one step removed) and "C" is the next below "B" (two steps removed), then when the jury is instructed on "B" yet still convicts the accused of "A" it is logical to assume that the panel would not have found him guilty only of "C" (that is, would have passed over "B"), so that the failure to instruct on "C" is harmless.