A. Y. G. v. State, 81-1583
| Decision Date | 08 June 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 81-1583,81-1583 |
| Citation | 414 So.2d 1158 |
| Parties | A. Y. G., a juvenile, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Deborah Whisnant, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Theda R. James, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before HUBBART, C. J., and NESBITT and DANIEL S. PEARSON, JJ.
This appeal presents the familiar problem of whether the juvenile's adjudication of delinquency for the crime of burglary is supported by sufficient circumstantial evidence to establish her intent to participate in the criminal activity. Finding that it is not, we reverse.
In the light most favorable to the state, the evidence established that A. Y. G. was seen in a vehicle parked behind a South Miami shopping center at four o'clock in the morning. Two male juveniles were observed hurriedly exiting the burglarized store, dropping items as they ran toward the automobile in which the appellant was seated. They quickly entered the passenger side of the vehicle and ordered A. Y. G. to drive away. She left the scene at a high speed. Observing officers gave pursuit, chasing the fleeing vehicle through two red lights before it crashed into a telephone pole and became disabled. The two males fled and the appellant was apprehended. She told arresting officers that one of the passengers had depressed the accelerator of the automobile and maneuvered the steering wheel. At trial, however, she testified that she had not been driving the vehicle.
Since there is no evidence that the juvenile actually entered the store, she may only be adjudicated of delinquency for burglary as an aider and abettor. Pack v. State, 381 So.2d 1199 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); Lockett v. State, 262 So.2d 253 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972). It is well established that to be convicted as an aider and abettor, the state must show an intent to participate in the perpetration of the crime. J. H. v. State, 370 So.2d 1219 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 379 So.2d 209 (Fla.1980). Where there is no direct evidence of intent, the circumstantial evidence relied upon to show such an intent must be such as to preclude every reasonable inference that the defendant did not intend to participate in the criminal activity. K. W. U. v. State, 367 So.2d 647 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 378 So.2d 349 (Fla.1979).
Evidence that the defendant was present at the scene of the crime and drove the "getaway" car at the request of the perpetrator of the burglary does not exclude the reasonable inference that the defendant had no knowledge of the crime until after it...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jones v. State
...the defendant aided and abetted his companions with criminal intent in an armed robbery; robbery conviction reversed); A.Y.G. v. State, 414 So.2d 1158 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (state's evidence deemed insufficient to establish that juvenile as the driver of the get-away car had any prior knowledg......
-
Fox v. State
...support the conviction, stating: Id., at 722-23. See also, Davis v. State, 436 So.2d 196, 199 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); A.Y.G. v. State, 414 So.2d 1158, 1159 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). The state's evidence against Fox is legally insufficient since there are reasonable inferences that may be fairly draw......
-
Davis v. State
...did appellant become aware of his companion's real purpose. Further, the Third District Court of Appeal said in A.Y.G. v. State, 414 So.2d 1158, 1159 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Since there is no evidence that the juvenile actually entered the store, she may only be adjudicated of delinquency for b......
-
Jackson v. State, 82-1817
...So.2d 719 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), rev. den., 426 So.2d 26 (Fla.1983); Stuckey v. State, 414 So.2d 1160 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); A.Y.G. v. State, 414 So.2d 1158 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); G.C. v. State, 407 So.2d 639 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); J.L.B. v. State, 396 So.2d 761 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Perez v. State, 390......