Garces v. State, 85-920
| Decision Date | 11 March 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 85-920,85-920 |
| Citation | 485 So.2d 847,11 Fla. L. Weekly 618 |
| Parties | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 618 Gustavo Angel GARCES, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Barbara S. Levenson, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Mark J. Berkowitz, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before BARKDULL, HUBBART and FERGUSON, JJ.
Defendant, Gustavo Angel Garces, appeals from a judgment of conviction and sentence for trafficking in cocaine by possession, and from the fifteen-year mandatory minimum sentence which was imposed.
In June 1984, Miami Police detective George Lopez met with German Mederos who, according to a police informant, was interested in purchasing six kilograms of cocaine. After several meetings and phone calls between Lopez, Mederos, and Rolondo Hernandez, Mederos informed Lopez that he was ready to complete the transaction and asked Lopez to meet him at his home. When Lopez arrived at Mederos' house, he was introduced to Guillermo Hincapie, Fernando Castano, and the defendant. After some discussion about how the exchange should take place, the parties agreed to bring in the money before Lopez turned over the cocaine.
Hincapie and the defendant went outside to get the money. The defendant stood outside and acted as a look-out as Hincapie drove his car into the garage. After Hincapie retrieved the money from the car's secret compartment the two men went back inside. A second undercover officer brought in a tote bag containing two packs of cocaine. Hincapie removed one of the packs from the bag, examined the cocaine, and commented on its quality. He handed the pack over to the defendant who examined it momentarily before passing it on to Castano. While the defendants were examining the cocaine, and before any money was exchanged, one of the men went to answer the telephone. Fearing that the arrest team would be seen as the phone was being answered, the second officer produced a firearm and placed the men under arrest.
Hernandez, Mederos, Castano, Hincapie and the defendant were charged with trafficking in cocaine by delivering cocaine or aiding, abetting, counseling, hiring or procuring the delivery, and/or by knowingly being in actual or constructive possession of four hundred grams of cocaine in violation of section 893.135, Florida Statutes (1983).
At the close of the State's case, defendant moved for a judgment of acquittal based on the State's failure to prove that he had taken part in the delivery of the cocaine or to prove that he was in possession of the cocaine. The motion was denied. By this appeal defendant asserts that the trial court erred in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Snyder, 92-02265
...included charge of attempted possession of methamphetamine. See Roberts v. State, 505 So.2d 547 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Garces v. State, 485 So.2d 847 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). Next, the state filed a sworn traverse to the appellee's motion, and because the traverse was sufficient, the motion should ......
-
Smith v. State
...of drug trafficking. Accordingly, the trial court should have reduced the subject charge to attempted drug trafficking. Garces v. State, 485 So.2d 847 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); see Roberts v. State, 505 So.2d 547 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); see also Campbell v. State, 577 So.2d 932 The final judgments of......
-
Cunningham v. State, 92-3628
...to exercise some control over drugs sufficient to present jury question of actual or constructive possession) with Garces v. State, 485 So.2d 847 (Fla. 3d DCA1986) (mere temporary control of drugs in presence of owner solely for purpose of verification or testing is legally insufficient to ......
-
Sanders v. State
...circumstances described here, without more, is insufficient to prove a criminal possession offense. 2 Appellant cites Garces v. State, 485 So.2d 847 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), as dispositive on this point. The Garces court held that the temporary control of contraband in the presence of its actual......