Zimmerman has already been proved guilty, now it's just a question of punishment.

[ctaylors6]

106. burden of presenting evidence

is not the same as burden of proof, in my opinion

In an earlier post, you stated, "It is up to Zimmerman to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he acted in self defense." I just posted this case law excerpt because my reading of Florida case law is different than your reading of it. As the FL case law states, "The burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, including the burden of proving that the defendant did
not act in self-defense, never shifts from the State to the defendant. Montijo, 61 So. 3d at 427; Fields, 988 So. 2d at 1188; see Monsansky v. State, 33 So. 3d 756 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)." I'm reading that as the the defense not having the burden of proof.

I'm not trying to be argumentative about anything. I'm just posting based on my reading of Florida case law, as opposed to general definitions and overviews of law that are not state specific. That is, after all, why we are licensed by individual states.