Hobson v. State
| Decision Date | 19 August 2005 |
| Docket Number | No. 1D04-2781.,1D04-2781. |
| Citation | 908 So.2d 1162 |
| Parties | Jefferey HOBSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender; Pamela Presnell Garvin, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
Charlie Crist, Attorney General; Thomas as H. Duffy, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
The appellant appeals his criminal judgment and sentence for one count of armed robbery and one count of aggravated fleeing or eluding. He contends he was wrongfully convicted of aggravated fleeing or eluding because the state could not prove an essential element of the offense; the trial court erred in sentencing him as a habitual felony offender (HFO) because the HFO statute is unconstitutional; and the trial court ordered him to pay an improper amount of attorney's fees. We reverse the appellant's conviction and sentence for aggravated fleeing or eluding because the evidence does not support that the crime of aggravated fleeing and eluding was committed, and remand for the trial court to enter judgment and sentence for the lesser included offense of misdemeanor fleeing or eluding. We otherwise affirm the appellant's judgment and sentence without discussion.1
On April 15, 2003, the appellant participated in the robbery of a convenience store by serving as the "get-away driver." After leaving the scene of the robbery, the appellant began to drive erratically and at a high rate of speed as a law enforcement officer pursued him with lights and sirens activated. During the course of the pursuit, the appellant struck a car. After striking the car, he continued to flee the officer. The appellant was apprehended when the van he was driving stalled in a field.
Thereafter, the appellant was charged with one count of aggravated fleeing or eluding in violation of section 316.1935(4), Florida Statutes (2002). Section 316.1935(4), provides, in relevant part:
The offense of aggravated fleeing or eluding is committed when: (1) the defendant leaves the scene of a crash involving injury, death, or property damage; (2) in the course of unlawfully leaving the crash scene, the defendant willfully flees or attempts to elude an officer after being ordered to stop; and (3) as a result of the fleeing or eluding the defendant causes further bodily injury or property damage. In this case, however, it is undisputed that law enforcement began its pursuit of the van driven by the appellant because the appellant and his co-defendant robbed a convenience store, not because the appellant left the scene of an accident involving injury, death, or property damage. Therefore, the first element of the offense is absent. See Santiago v. State, 847 So.2d 1060, 1062 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)
. Also absent is the third element of further property damage or injury after striking the car and continuing flight. Therefore, the appellant was wrongly convicted of the offense of aggravated fleeing or eluding.
The state contends that the appellant's "bare bones" motion for judgment of acquittal did not preserve any errors, but a conviction for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nuckles v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corrs.
...be "totally insufficient as a matter of law to establish the commission of a crime"—a "complete failure." Id.; see Hobson v. State, 908 So. 2d 1162, 1164 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (explaining that "a conviction for an offense that did not take place constitutes fundamental reversible error").Acco......
-
Connor v. State
...of its right to appeal6 because an order not reduced to writing is not a final order subject to review. See Hobson v. State, 908 So.2d 1162, 1163 n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); State v. Johnson, 892 So.2d 563 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Walker v. State, 647 So.2d 262 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (concluding the......
-
Odom v. State
...violated"). "[A] conviction for an offense that did not take place constitutes fundamental reversible error." Hobson v. State, 908 So.2d 1162, 1164 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); see F.B., 852 So.2d at 230-31; Santiago v. State, 847 So.2d 1060, 1062 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Griffin v. State, 705 So.2d 572......
-
Nuckles v. State, 1D14–2036.
...be “totally insufficient as a matter of law to establish the commission of a crime”—a “complete failure.” Id.; see Hobson v. State, 908 So.2d 1162, 1164 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (explaining that “a conviction for an offense that did not take place constitutes fundamental reversible error”).Accor......
-
Crimes
...first element of the crime is not established. (See this case for discussion of the elements of aggravated fleeing.) Hobson v. State, 908 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) Second District Court of Appeal The nonresident exception provided under § 320.37(1) does not apply when the evidence doe......