Atwell v. State, 2D03-3522.
| Decision Date | 17 November 2004 |
| Docket Number | No. 2D03-3522.,2D03-3522. |
| Citation | 886 So.2d 421 |
| Parties | Walter Lee ATWELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Mark C. Katzef, Special Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Chandra Waite Dasrat, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.
Walter Lee Atwell was convicted of four counts of armed robbery and four counts of kidnapping. He received eight concurrent life sentences as a prison releasee reoffender. Atwell challenges one of the convictions for armed robbery. We affirm the judgments and sentences for three of the armed robbery convictions and the judgments and sentences for the four kidnapping convictions. We reverse the judgment and sentence for one conviction for armed robbery only.
Atwell and an accomplice entered a business establishment and held Janice, Wendy, Shirley, and Kim at gunpoint. While three of the women sat in the back of the store, Atwell took Wendy to the front of the store to the cash register. Wendy complied with the orders to open the cash register and to remove the money. The men then took money from the purses of Janice, Wendy, and Shirley. Kim did not have a purse with her and no money or property was taken from her person.
On appeal Atwell argues that the trial court erred when it denied his motion for judgment of acquittal for the robbery of Kim because he did not take any money or property from her. The State asserts that because Kim was an employee of the business establishment the money in the cash register was in her custody; therefore, evidence that Atwell took the money from the cash register was sufficient to sustain the conviction for the robbery of Kim. We disagree.
In Pagan v. State, 830 So.2d 792, 803 (Fla.2002), the Florida Supreme Court summarized the standard of review on a motion for judgment of acquittal:
In reviewing a motion for judgment of acquittal, a de novo standard of review applies. Generally, an appellate court will not reverse a conviction which is supported by competent, substantial evidence. If, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, a rational trier of fact could find the existence of the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, sufficient evidence exists to sustain a conviction.
Id. at 803 (citations omitted). The statutory definition of robbery is set out in section 812.13(1), Florida Statutes (2001):
"Robbery" means the taking of money or other property which may be the subject of larceny from the person or custody of another, with intent to either...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Labarbara v. State
...only one forceful taking of money from one cash register, only one conviction for armed robbery can stand." Id. In Atwell v. State, 886 So.2d 421, 422 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004), Atwell and an accomplice held four women at gunpoint during a robbery in a store, and this court reversed one of the fou......
- Ogletree v. State, 2D03-4856.