JM v. State, 1D03-3468.
Decision Date | 10 May 2004 |
Docket Number | No. 1D03-3468.,1D03-3468. |
Citation | 872 So.2d 985 |
Parties | J.M., a Child, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender; David P. Gauldin, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.
Charlie Crist, Attorney General; Anne C. Conley, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for appellee.
Appellant, J.M., a juvenile, was charged with and found guilty of (I) possession of a weapon on school property in violation of section 790.115(2)(b) or 790.115(2)(c), Florida Statutes; and (II) intentional assault with a knife, a deadly weapon without intent to kill, in violation of section 784.021(1)(a), Florida Statutes. The issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred in denying appellant's motion to dismiss as to count II at the close of the State's case and at the close of all the evidence. We affirm.
Appellant concedes that the small pocket knife possessed and used by appellant falls within the proscription of a "weapon" as used in the statute governing the possession offense charged in count I.1 Appellant also concedes that as to the charge of aggravated assault under count II, the weapon in this case, a common pocket knife, may constitute a "weapon" for purposes of the charging statute, section 784.021(1)(a), if it is used as a deadly weapon, i.e., if it is used in a manner likely to produce death or great bodily injury.2
The assault in this case took place during school hours in the hallway of a middle school where both the victim and appellant were students. The victim testified that appellant was waving the pocket knife at him with the blade exposed, threatening to "poke" him, and almost poking him in the chest area. Although upon viewing the pocket knife alone reasonable people could disagree as to whether the pocket knife was a "deadly weapon" there was sufficient testimony and evidence in the record to support the trial court's conclusion that appellant's display of the knife blade and threat to poke the victim with the pocket knife in the chest made it a deadly weapon.
The order appealed from is affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Landrum v. Sec'y Dep't of Corr.
...harm because of the way it is used during a crime. See D.B.B. v. State, 997 So. 2d 484, 485 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008); J.M. v. State, 872 So. 2d 985, 986 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Cloninger v. State, 846 So. 2d 1192, 1193 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). A jury's finding must be based upon evidence, or reasonable ......
-
Cassidy v. McNeil
...offense. Where the pocketknife is used, as opposed to merely possessed, the pocketknife may be a deadly weapon. See J.M. v. State, 872 So.2d 985 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (holding there was sufficient evidence to support a conviction for intentional assault with a deadly weapon; defendant's displ......
-
Delmoral v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
...Viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, this evidence proved that the knife was a deadly weapon. J.M. v. State, 872 So. 2d 985, 986-87 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) ("[A]ppellant's display of the [pocket] knife blade and threat to poke the victim with the pocket knife in the chest made......
-
Crimes
...threatens to “poke” the victim, the court properly finds the weapon to be a deadly weapon for aggravated assault purposes. J.M. v. State, 872 So. 2d 985 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) Trial court erred in granting motion for arrest of judgment and reducing the conviction from aggravated assault to sim......