Glover v. State
Decision Date | 02 October 2003 |
Docket Number | No. SC02-1064.,SC02-1064. |
Citation | 863 So.2d 236 |
Parties | Bruce W. GLOVER, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Marvin F. Clegg, Assistant Public Defender, Seventh Judicial Circuit, Daytona Beach, FL, for Petitioner.
Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, and Carmen F. Corrente, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, FL, for Respondent.
We have for review Glover v. State, 815 So.2d 698 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), which expressly and directly conflicts with Jesus v. State, 565 So.2d 1361 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. For the following reasons, we approve the decision in the instant case and disapprove the Fourth District Court of Appeal's decision in Jesus.
In April 2000, Bruce Glover was charged with capital sexual battery under section 794.011(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1999). In the information, the State alleged that the victim was under twelve years of age and that Glover was over eighteen years of age. Glover was thirty-five years old at the time he committed the offense. During the trial, the parties did not dispute that Glover was over eighteen. Glover was ultimately convicted of capital sexual battery and sentenced to life imprisonment.
Glover appealed his conviction to the Fifth District Court of Appeal, arguing that his conviction was invalid because the trial court did not specifically instruct the jury that the age of the defendant was an element of the offense of capital sexual battery that must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The district court agreed and held that age is in fact an element of capital sexual battery.
Indeed, it seems that if the age of the victim (under twelve) is an element of the offense (and this is recognized by the Standard Jury Instruction on sexual battery of a victim under twelve which was given by the court in the instant case), then the age of the defendant, set out in the same section of the statute creating the offense, should also be.
Glover, 815 So.2d at 699. In so holding, the district court noted that its holding was consistent with the decisions in Baker v. State, 604 So.2d 1239 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992), and D'Ambrosio v. State, 736 So.2d 44 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). The court, however, recognized conflict with the Fourth District Court of Appeal's decision in Jesus.
Although the Fifth District held that age is an element of the crime of sexual battery, the court concluded that any error in the trial court's instruction was harmless in this case. The district court reasoned that even though the trial court did not label Glover's age as an element, it clearly advised the jury that Glover had to be over eighteen to be convicted of the main charge. The court stated that under the facts of this case, Glover, 815 So.2d at 700. The court therefore upheld Glover's conviction.
Glover sought review of the Fifth District's decision in this Court, alleging conflict with Jesus v. State, 565 So.2d 1361 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), in which the Fourth District held that age is not an element of capital sexual battery. We granted jurisdiction on the basis of that conflict.
We resolve the conflict between the opinions of the Fifth District in this case and the Third District in Baker and the opinion of the Fourth District in Jesus by approving the Fifth District and Third District's...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Galindez v. State
...in State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla. 1986), to claims of failure to instruct on an undisputed element. See Glover v. State, 863 So.2d 236, 237-38 (Fla.2003) (approving the district court's holding that the age of the defendant is an element of capital sexual battery but that any error......
-
Insko v. State
...So.2d at 682-83. The court certified the following question as one of great public importance: "In light of the ruling in Glover v. State, 863 So.2d 236 (Fla.2003), is the age of the offender an element of the offense of lewd or lascivious conduct under section 800.04(6), Florida Below, we ......
-
State v. Johnston
...F.3d 992, 996 (8th Cir.2006); Toussaint v. State, 755 So.2d 170, 172 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.2000), overruled on other grounds by Glover v. State, 863 So.2d 236 (Fla.2003); People v. Westpfahl, 295 Ill.App.3d 327, 330-31, 229 Ill.Dec. 842, 692 N.E.2d 831 ¶ 34 More importantly, this majority approa......
-
Anderson v. Sec'y Dep't of Corr.
...to relief on this basis. See Jesus v. State, 565 So.2d 1361 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (disapproved of on other grounds by, Glover v. State, 863 So.2d 236 (Fla. 2003)). Ex. 39 at On appeal, the First DCA per curiam affirmed the case without a written opinion. Ex. 42; Anderson v. State, 322 So.3d 4......