Benitez v. State, 4D04-697.
| Decision Date | 27 April 2005 |
| Docket Number | No. 4D04-697.,4D04-697. |
| Parties | Carlos BENITEZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and James W. McIntire, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Donna M. Hoffmann, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
The defendant appeals his conviction and sentence for aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer with a firearm, driving with a suspended driver's license, and driving under the influence. He argues the court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal on the aggravated assault charge. We agree and reverse.
A sheriff's deputy saw a small white pickup truck driving toward him. It had no tail lights. The truck lurched as it proceeded slowly toward him as if the driver was having trouble shifting gears. The deputy turned around to follow the truck. He activated his lights and conducted a traffic stop.
Using the public address system, the deputy directed the defendant to stop his vehicle and turn off the ignition. The defendant stopped and kept his foot on the brake. He did not turn off the ignition.
The deputy exited his patrol car and approached the defendant. He detected a strong odor of alcohol, noticed the defendant's eyes were glassy and bloodshot, and saw several beer cans in the vehicle. Because the defendant did not turn off the ignition, the deputy reached in the truck, turned off the ignition, and removed the keys.
The deputy asked the defendant for his license and registration. The defendant had neither. The defendant told the deputy that a friend owned the truck, but did not know he had taken it. The deputy asked the defendant to open the glove compartment to see if he could locate the registration. At that point, the defendant's demeanor changed. He ignored the instruction and looked straight ahead. The defendant then leaned slightly forward, moved his hand off the gear shift and placed it behind the small of his back.
The deputy testified that such gestures are considered "a danger cue" that police officers are trained to watch for. He ordered the defendant to keep his hands where he could see them, and asked him what he was trying to retrieve. The defendant did not answer and did not remove his hands from the small of his back.
The deputy's concern heightened when the defendant continued to ignore him. He stepped back and started looking in the area where the defendant was keeping his hands. The deputy saw the defendant had something behind his back and became "seriously concerned" that the defendant was arming himself with a weapon. The deputy ordered the defendant to drop what was in his hand. The defendant looked at the deputy with a "blank stare," and then looked behind his back. The deputy testified he was in "absolute fear at that point that something [bad was] about to happen."
At this point, the deputy opened the defendant's door, took control of his left arm, and pushed him into the steering wheel. He looked behind the defendant and saw that his hand was holding a dark-colored pistol. The gun was "almost upside down pointing down at an angle in the open space, it would almost—pointed almost directly like my knees pointed in that area behind his back." The defendant was holding the gun "in what would be considered a firing or shooting grip and his hand was rotating down behind his back to where the—his hand and the grip and the handgun itself were all inverted, they were all upside down." It was subsequently learned the gun was unloaded; no bullets were found in the vehicle.
The State charged the defendant with aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer with a firearm, driving under the influence, and driving with a suspended driver's license. At the close of the State's case, the defendant moved for a judgment of acquittal on the aggravated assault charge. He argued the State had failed to prove the defendant's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Somers v. United States
...that would support a finding that the appellant intentionally threatened the victim." 207 So. 3d at 906. See also Benitez v. State, 901 So. 2d 935, 937 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (reversing aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer conviction because "the defendant's act of placing his hand ......
-
U.S. v. El-Amin, No. 08-16642 (11th Cir. 8/28/2009), 08-16642.
...(2) an apparent ability to carry it out; and (3) creation of a well-founded fear that the violence is imminent." Benitez v. State, 901 So.2d 935, 937 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005). The assault is "aggravated" if, inter alia, it is committed "[w]ith a deadly weapon without intent to kill . . . ......
-
Pinkney v. State
...of aggravated assault, the State must prove the basic elements of an assault as set out in section 784.011. See Benitez v. State, 901 So.2d 935, 937 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). “An ‘assault’ is an intentional, unlawful threat by word or act to do violence to the person of another, coupled with an ......
-
Cannon v. Thomas ex rel. Jewett
...of a well-founded fear that the violence is imminent.” H.W. v. State, 79 So.3d 143, 145 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) (citing Benitez v. State, 901 So.2d 935, 937 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)). Here, the undisputed evidence does not support a finding that Appellant committed assault by sending the threat by Fa......
-
Crimes
...a well-founded fear, the evidence does not show that the defendant intentionally and unlawfully threatened the officer. Benitez v. State, 901 So. 2d 935 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) The victim need not testify to his state of mind in an aggravated assault case when there is other evidence that the v......