Barket v. State
| Decision Date | 16 February 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 51192,51192 |
| Citation | 356 So.2d 263 |
| Parties | Samuel Essie BARKET, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Albert J. Datz and Samuel S. Jacobson, of Datz, Jacobson & Dusek, Jacksonville, for petitioner.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Wallace E. Allbritton, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for respondent.
Following his conviction for receiving stolen property, Samuel Barket appealed to the First District Court of Appeal challenging the validity of former Florida Standard Jury Instruction 2.06, insofar as it allowed the jury to find him guilty without proof of his actual knowledge that property in his possession was stolen. 1 The district court affirmed Barket's conviction and certified its decision to us as having passed upon a question of great public interest. 2 We accept jurisdiction under Article V, Section 3(b)(3) of the Florida Constitution.
The district court correctly rejected each of Barket's challenges to the jury instruction, and properly affirmed his conviction. When our instruction on the type of proof necessary to attribute to a defendant knowledge that goods in his possession were stolen is considered with all other instructions given to the jury relative to the state's burden of proof, we cannot say that there is error which requires a reversal of Barket's conviction. Forrest v. State, 133 Fla. 310, 182 So. 849 (1938). The certified question is answered accordingly, and the decision of the district court is affirmed. 3
1 The challenged portion of the jury instruction provides:
This instruction has been amended to reflect changes to former § 811.16, Fla.Stat. (1973), which now appear in § 812.031, Fla.Stat. (1975).
2 The district court's opinion is reported at 342 So.2d 526.
3 Having determined the certified question, we decline to entertain other issues raised here by petitioner but resolved by the district court.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nelson v. State, 78-2086
...in its burden of proving guilty knowledge of stolen property. See, e. g., Barket v. State, 342 So.2d 526 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977) aff'd 356 So.2d 263 (Fla.1977), cert. denied 439 U.S. 843, 99 S.Ct. 136, 58 L.Ed.2d 142 (1978); O'Sullivan v. State, 335 So.2d 869 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Aboy v. State, ......
-
State v. Tomas, 53950
...with our recent pronouncement concerning the requisite proof of knowledge as to the stolen character of property in Barket v. State, 356 So.2d 263 (Fla.1978). See also State v. Graham, 238 So.2d 618 (Fla.1970), discussing the necessary quantum of proof required to establish guilty knowledge......
- Bauer v. Resolution Trust Corp.