C.H.C. v. State
| Decision Date | 01 August 2008 |
| Docket Number | No. 2D07-3426.,2D07-3426. |
| Citation | 988 So.2d 1145 |
| Parties | C.H.C., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Kevin Briggs, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Chandra Waite Dasrat, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.
C.H.C. challenges his delinquency adjudication for obstructing or opposing an officer without violence, a violation of section 843.02, Florida Statutes (2006). We reverse the adjudication because the State's evidence fell short of establishing that the deputy was engaged in the lawful execution of any legal duty when he attempted to detain C.H.C.
Deputy Patrick Cole was the only witness to testify at the adjudicatory hearing. While driving in his patrol car on December 21, 2006, at approximately 2:30 p.m., he heard a call go out for a disturbance in the area. He was not dispatched on it, but after a few minutes, one of the deputies at the scene asked for backup. Deputy Cole headed to the area. When he arrived at the scene, he saw his corporal walking down a flight of stairs, surrounded by a large group of people. He asked his corporal, "What do you want me to do?" Deputy Cole was directed to detain C.H.C. Deputy Cole then observed C.H.C., who "was walking in a circle clinching his fists and yelling profan[ities]." The deputy did not know exactly what C.H.C. was saying. The deputy described C.H.C. as "screaming and yelling at the ... deputies on [the] scene." When Deputy Cole approached C.H.C., they made eye contact, and the deputy said, "Come over here." C.H.C. ran from the area. The deputy yelled, "Police, stop," but C.H.C. continued to run. The deputy chased C.H.C., but lost visual contact. Deputy Cole placed a radio alert. Other deputies then found C.H.C. and detained him.
The crime of obstructing or opposing an officer without violence requires a showing that the officer was engaged in the lawful execution of any legal duty. § 843.02; Davis v. State, 973 So.2d 1277, 1279 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008); E.A.B. v. State, 851 So.2d 308, 310 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (). "In cases involving an investigatory detention, it is necessary for the State to prove that the officer had a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity that would support the detention." Davis, 973 So.2d at 1279 (citing Tillman v. State, 934 So.2d 1263, 1271 (Fla.2006)); see also E.A.B., 851 So.2d at 311 (). Thus, the State was required to establish that Deputy Cole would have been justified in detaining C.H.C. based on a founded suspicion that C.H.C. was engaged in criminal activity.
The State did not show that Deputy Cole had the necessary reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. First, the conduct attributed to C.H.C. before he fled does not constitute "disorderly conduct" because the deputy did not indicate that C.H.C. was inciting an immediate breach of the peace. See W.L. v. State, 769 So.2d 1132 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (); L.A.T. v. State, 650 So.2d 214 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
C.E.L. v. State
...to the obstruction charge, the juvenile also had an outstanding warrant. 11. A challenge such as this was raised in C.H.C. v. State, 988 So.2d 1145 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). There, a deputy attempted to detain a juvenile who was walking in a circle, clenching his fists, and yelling profanities. T......
-
Jessup v. Miami-Dade Cnty.
...Davis v. State, 973 So. 2d 1277, 1279 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008) (citation omitted). Applying this principle, in C.H.C. v. State, 988 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008), the court held that the defendant's actions in fleeing from an officer after the officer had directed him to stop did......
-
Henderson v. State
...is nothing on the record to impute” to Deputy Lloyd. J.P. v. State, 855 So.2d 1262, 1265 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Accord C.H.C. v. State, 988 So.2d 1145 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). We also reject the state's claim that the arrest warrant issued five hours later justified the stop, absent any record evi......
-
M.W. v. State
...officer without violence requires a showing that the officer was engaged in the lawful execution of any legal duty." C.H.C. v. State, 988 So.2d 1145, 1146 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). And when the duty being performed by the officer is an arrest, as in this case, the lawfulness of the arrest is an e......
-
Crimes
...officer was engaged in the lawful execution of his duties, and the court errs in finding him guilty of resisting. C.H.C. v. State, 988 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) The state presented evidence that employees of a restaurant called police to report a “suspicious incident” involving defenda......