C.P.P. v. State, BF-249

Decision Date18 December 1985
Docket NumberNo. BF-249,BF-249
Parties11 Fla. L. Weekly 5 C.P.P., a child, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Louis O. Frost, Jr., Public Defender, Thomas E. Duffy, Asst. Public Defender, Jacksonville, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Henri C. Cawthon, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.

ERVIN, Judge.

C.P.P. appeals from an order of adjudication of delinquency, for the offenses of burglary and grand theft. He argues that the lower court erred in adjudicating him a delinquent child on the theory that he acted as an aider and abettor, because the evidence was insufficient to establish appellant's commission of such offenses in such capacity. We agree and reverse.

The evidence against appellant consists essentially of the testimony of a store manager stating that his store was burglarized, and that entry was accomplished through a roof hatch, resulting in the theft of approximately $2,000 worth of merchandise; and appellant's confession, admitting his presence in an automobile at the store premises while two other persons left the car, and returned two and one-half hours later, placing four or five bags in the trunk. Appellant also admitted having prior knowledge that the two others intended to burglarize the store and take goods therefrom. Finally, he admitted that another person remained in the car for the purpose of serving as a lookout. We agree that appellant's motion for judgment of acquittal should have been granted on the ground that the circumstantial evidence presented did not exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

To convict appellant as an aider and abettor, the state had to show that he (1) assisted the actual perpetrators by doing or saying something that caused, encouraged, assisted or incited the perpetrators to actually commit the crime; and (2) intended to participate in the crime. Howard v. State, 473 So.2d 841 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Horton v. State, 442 So.2d 1064 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). "Where the state relies on circumstantial evidence to establish the accused's assistance and intent to participate, it is necessary to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence." J.W. v. State, 467 So.2d 796, 797 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985).

In the case at bar, the state proved: (1) the burglary of the store; (2) appellant's knowledge that the burglary was being committed; and (3) appellant's presence at or near the store shortly before and after the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • A.B.G. v. State, 91-482
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • September 18, 1991
    ...assisted, or incited the perpetrators to actually commit the crime, and (2) intended to participate in the crime. C.P.P. v. State, 479 So.2d 858, 879 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); B.W. v. State, The elements of assistance of the perpetrator and intent may be proven by a combination of surrounding ci......
  • E.B. v. State, 90-170
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • October 30, 1990
    ...witnessed the crime. W.B. v. State, 554 So.2d 577 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Valdez v. State, 504 So.2d 9 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); C.P.P. v. State, 479 So.2d 858 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); J.W. v. State; A.Y.G. v. State, 414 So.2d 1158 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Douglas v. State, 214 So.2d 653 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968); s......
  • TB v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • April 16, 1999
    ...or saying something that caused, encouraged, assisted or incited the perpetrators to actually commit the crime." C.P.P. v. State, 479 So.2d 858, 859 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); B.W. v. State, 546 So.2d 29 (Fla. 1st DCA At the adjudicatory hearing, the State's first witness, Latifah Shareef, testif......
  • Jones v. State, 96-0268
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • April 2, 1997
    ...of, a criminal act. See Evans v. State, 643 So.2d 1204 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), rev. denied, 652 So.2d 818 (Fla.1995); C.P.P. v. State, 479 So.2d 858 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Appellant may have done or said something to further the robbery--but the record does not show On the other hand, the eviden......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT