Hendry v. State, s. 90-01189

Decision Date14 December 1990
Docket Number90-01257,Nos. 90-01189,s. 90-01189
Citation571 So.2d 94
Parties15 Fla. L. Weekly D3006 Jimmy Clemont HENDRY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. Trina Irene HENDRY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Earl W. Baden, Jr., Bradenton, for appellant Jimmy Hendry.

Harmon J. Karasick, Bradenton, for appellant Trina Hendry.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and David R. Gemmer, Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court's denials of defendants' motions to dismiss the informations in which defendants were charged with incest under section 826.04, Florida Statutes (1987). That section renders felonious marriage or sexual intercourse with a person to whom a defendant "is related by lineal consanguinity." The informations alleged that defendants were father and daughter and that they were either married to each other or had had sexual intercourse with each other. It has been stipulated that defendant Trina Hendry had been adopted by a third party prior to her marriage to defendant Jimmy Clemont Hendry.

We recognize that the adoption statute includes in section 63.172(1)(b) the provision that adoption "terminates all legal relationships between the adopted person and his relatives, including his natural parents ... so that the adopted person thereafter is a stranger to his former relatives for all purposes...." However, as the Indiana Supreme Court has held, an adoption statute cannot erase lineal consanguinity. "It of course is impossible to nullify by legislative declaration the fact that the biological parents continue to be blood relatives of the child; the link of consanguinity cannot be erased by enactment." Bohall v. State, 546 N.E.2d 1214, 1215 (Ind.1989). Furthermore, we...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Borden v. Phillips
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 16 d3 Fevereiro d3 2000
    ... ... 1st DCA 1999) ...         State courts have concurrent jurisdiction with federal courts over admiralty cases under the savings to ... ...
  • Beam v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 23 d5 Janeiro d5 2009
    ...incest include the prevention of pregnancies which may involve a high risk of abnormal or defective offspring." In Hendry v. State, 571 So.2d 94 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), the only Florida case addressing incest and adoption, the court held that the adoption statute, section 63.172, cannot erase t......
  • State v. Hall, 27255-5-II.
    • United States
    • Washington Court of Appeals
    • 14 d5 Junho d5 2002
    ...at 1215. We agree that adoption cannot alter biology. "[A]n adoption statute cannot erase lineal consanguinity." Hendry v. State, 571 So.2d 94, 95 (Fla. Dist.Ct.App.1990). RCW 9A.64.020(3) does not limit "descendant" to those persons expressly named. Rather, the statute's use of the term "i......
  • State v. Bale, 18285
    • United States
    • South Dakota Supreme Court
    • 2 d4 Dezembro d4 1993
    ...303 (6th ed, 1990). An adoption statute cannot erase lineal consanguinity and then create a new lineal consanguinity. Hendry v. State, 571 So.2d 94 (Fla.App. 2d Dist.1990). "It of course is impossible to nullify by legislative declaration the fact that the biological parents continue to be ......

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