J. M. C. v. State
| Decision Date | 04 May 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 75--1171,75--1171 |
| Citation | 331 So.2d 366 |
| Parties | J.M.C. and D.P.S., juveniles, Appellants, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Gerald D. Hubbart, Asst. Public Defender, for appellants.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Linda C. Hertz, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Ivan K. Chesler, Legal Intern, for appellee.
Before HENDRY and HAVERFIELD, JJ., and CHARLES CARROLL (Ret.), Associate Judge.
Appellants seek review of their adjudications of delinquency for violations of § 784.04, Fla.Stat.
The victim, Mrs. Phillips, became involved in a verbal altercation with the appellant J.M.C. and her sister. Subsequently, Mr. Phillips and surrounded by five or six teenage girls and fight ensued during which J.M.C. kicked or attempted to kick Mrs. Phillips. Appellant D.P.S. observed J.M.C. and Mrs. Phillips fighting and she struck Mrs. Phillips on the back with a stick causing her to fall down. While lying helpless on the ground Mrs. Phillips was cut by the girls who fled after the police were called. As a result of this incident, J.M.C. was adjudicated delinquent for assault with a deadly weapon (§ 784.04, Fla.Stat.) and D.P.S. was so adjudicated for assault and battery with a deadly weapon (§ 784.04, Fla.Stat.).
D.P.S. contends there is no evidence that she cut Mrs. Phillips and a stick is not a deadly weapon. Therefore, a finding of guilt as to aggravated assault was erroneous.
The gist of the crime of aggravated assault is found in the character of the weapon with which the assault is made, i.e. whether it is deadly or not, and there is no requirement for the addition of a specific intent over and above that required for simple assault. Goswick v. State, Fla.1962, 143 So.2d 817; Bass v. State, Fla.Pp.1970, 232 So.2d 25. Further, whether or not the particular weapon in an assault case is to be classified as deadly or not is a factual question to be determined by the trier of the facts. City of Miami v. Gaskell, Fla.App.1973, 285 So.2d 666.
We find that there is sufficient competent evidence to sustain the finding that the stick was a deadly weapon in that it was large enough to cause the victim to be knocked to the ground upon being struck with it on her back. Cf. Bass v. State, Fla.App.1965, 172 So.2d 614.
In addition, we also note that Mrs. Phillips was cut several times by the girls and at the very least, D.P.S. could be found responsible as an aider and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lanier v. State
...4th DCA 1982); State v. Shorette, 404 So.2d 816 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981); Russell v. State, 373 So.2d 97 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979); J.M.C. v. State, 331 So.2d 366 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), embrace the consensual, non-violent conduct which occurred in the present case. Therefore, the instant prosecution of the......
-
Miller v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
...proved that the stool leg was a deadly weapon. Coronado v. State, 654 So. 2d 1267, 1269-70 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); J.M.C. v. State, 331 So. 2d 366, 367 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). When assessing prejudice under Strickland, a court presumes that the jury followed the law. Strickland, 466 U.S. at 695 ("T......
-
Nash v. State
...Lindsey v. State, 67 Fla. 111, 64 So. 501 (1914); Johnson v. State, 249 So.2d 452 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971); J.M.C. and D.P.S. v. State, 331 So.2d 366 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1976); Forchion v. State, 214 So.2d 751 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1968); Solitro v. State, 165 So.2d 223 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964).3 Bass v. State, 232......
-
Reynolds v. State, 83-626
...State, 92 Fla. 980, 111 So. 124 (1927) (motor vehicle); Lindsay v. State, 67 Fla. 111, 64 So. 501 (1914) (large stick); J.M.C. v. State, 331 So.2d 366 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976) (large stick); State v. Nixon, 295 So.2d 121 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974) (pocket knife); Johnson v. State, 249 So.2d 452 (Fla. 4th......