Blitch v. State, 66--94
| Decision Date | 17 January 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 66--94,66--94 |
| Citation | 194 So.2d 1 |
| Parties | Wilder Morris BLITCH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Ellis S. Rubin, Sheldon M. Yavitz, Miami Beach, for appellant.
Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Arden M. Siegendorf, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before HENDRY, C.J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, JJ.
An information was filed against the defendant for committing the felony of mayhem. The information recites that 'said defendant did cut, slit and mutilate the nose of one John Whitney Nixon, Jr., with a broken porcelain beer mug.' The defendant entered a plea of not guilty and waived jury trial.
At the conclusion of the state's case in chief, the trial court reduced the charge to aggravated assault on defendant's motion for a directed verdict. Defendant was found guilty of aggravated assault and sentenced to eighteen months in the state penitentiary.
The defendant contends that a charge of mayhem that fails to allege the use of a deadly weapon does not include the lesser offense of aggravated assault. Defendant also contends that the beer mug should not have been admitted into evidence without the establishment of an unbroken chain of possession from the time of the alleged assault or recovery of the beer mug to the time of its presentation in court.
To include the lesser offense of aggravated assault, a charge must allege that the assault was made with a deadly weapon. Lindsey v. State, 53 Fla. 56, 43 So. 87 (1907). Our Supreme Court has defined a deadly weapon as 'one likely to produce death or great bodily injury', and stated that '(w)hether or not the weapon involved is to be classed as 'deadly' is a factual question to be resolved by the jury under appropriate instructions.' Goswick v. State, Fla.1962, 143 So.2d 817, 820.
The charge of mayhem alleged that the injury was caused by a broken porcelain beer mug. The trial judge, as trier of facts, found that the beer mug was a deadly weapon. Therefore, the charge of mayhem did include the lesser offense of aggravated assault.
The victim testified that during the altercation in the back seat of his car with the defendant he saw something white up in the air which was followed by a sharp blow on the side of his head. The victim stated that the sharp blow was caused by something a lot harder than a fist, 'like it could have been the beer mug hitting the side of my face, and then the handle...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Redondo v. State
...as a clerk at a U-Totem store when he was unlawfully assaulted by a customer with a deadly weapon to wit: a bottle, Blitch v. State, 194 So.2d 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967); Dey v. State, 182 So.2d 266 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966), that this attack was preceded by the customer's obscene criticism of the store......
-
State v. Anderson
...not entitled to an instruction on aggravated assault unless the mayhem charge alleges it was committed within a weapon. Blitch v. State, 194 So.2d 1 (Fla.App.3d, 1967). Fornication is within the general scope of rape but a requested instruction on fornication in a prosecution for rape was p......
-
Colainni v. State
...1891, 28 Fla. 113, 9 So. 835; Lindsey v. State, 1907, 53 Fla. 56, 43 So. 87; Solitro v. State, Fla.App.1966, 165 So.2d 223; Blitch v. State, Fla.App.1967, 194 So.2d 1. And the crime of aggravated assault may be committed without either a battery or a wounding. See cases cited, By the testim......
-
Ruiz v. State, 66--417
...the card bearing the appellant's prints as the one which had been made by him. Urga v. State, Fla.App.1963, 155 So.2d 719; Blitch v. State, Fla.App.1967, 194 So.2d 1. No reversible error having been made to appear, the judgment appealed from is Affirmed. ...