Knight v. State, No. 86-1516

CourtCourt of Appeal of Florida (US)
Writing for the CourtCOBB; DAUKSCH; UPCHURCH
Citation506 So.2d 1182,12 Fla. L. Weekly 1236
Parties12 Fla. L. Weekly 1236 Randall C. KNIGHT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Docket NumberNo. 86-1516
Decision Date14 May 1987

Page 1182

506 So.2d 1182
12 Fla. L. Weekly 1236
Randall C. KNIGHT, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 86-1516.
District Court of Appeal of Florida,
Fifth District.
May 14, 1987.

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Michael L. O'Neill, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Sean Daly, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

COBB, Judge.

Randall Knight appeals from a judgment and sentence imposed after he was found guilty by a jury of charges that he sexually abused his stepdaughter. The amended information charged Knight with two counts of sexual battery upon a child under the age of twelve in violation of section 794.011(2), Florida Statutes, and one count of sexual activity while in position of familial

Page 1183

authority in violation of section 794.041(2)(b). The information alleged that the first sexual battery occurred between January 1, 1977 and December 31, 1980; the second sexual battery occurred between January 1, 1981 and February 11, 1984; and the third offense occurred between February 12, 1984 and December 31, 1984.

Knight filed several motions in limine as well as a motion to dismiss on grounds of vagueness, alleging an inability to prepare a defense since the information did not allege specific dates. More specifically, Knight argued that he would not be able to prepare an alibi defense or otherwise defend himself due to the wide time period involved. Knight also argued that he would possibly be exposed to a double jeopardy violation since the dates were not specific enough. The trial court declined to require the state to narrow the four-year period for count one and the over-three-year period for count two, first by denying the motion to dismiss and then by denying a motion for statement of particulars. The time frame for the third count was later narrowed to between October 1, 1984 and December 31, 1984.

The victim was able to recall before trial incidents in relation to her grade in school, but the state made no attempt to correlate the first two counts in the information to this testimony. The state's failure distinguishes this case from cases where the state did amend the information to provide more specific times. See State v. Belton, 468 So.2d 495 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985) (statement of particulars narrowed time span from 20 to 6 days); State v. Bandi, 338 So.2d 75 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976), cert. denied, 344 So.2d 323 (Fla.1977) (time...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 practice notes
  • State v. Ambrosia, No. L-88-058
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Ohio)
    • May 4, 1990
    ...In support of his argument, appellant relies on Ohio case law and cases from other jurisdictions, namely, Knight v. State (Fla.App.1987), 506 So.2d 1182; People v. MacAfee (1980), 76 App.Div.2d 157, 431 N.Y.S.2d 149; and United States v. Parente (D.Conn.1978), 449 F.Supp. In order to determ......
  • State v. Theriault, Nos. 90-1353
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • December 5, 1991
    ...So.2d 1181 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986) overruled our prior decisions of Goble v. State, 535 So.2d 706 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988) and Knight v. State, 506 So.2d 1182 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). Because of our holding, we are not required to address this argument, but we do note that Tingley involved an informatio......
  • State v. Dell'Orfano, No. 90-0955
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • January 8, 1992
    ...considered Goble v. State, 535 So.2d 706 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988), State v. Garcia, 511 So.2d 714 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), and Knight v. State, 506 So.2d 1182 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), in concluding that a dismissal of an information under these circumstances is required. Although we would not normally go......
  • State v. Jones, No. 87-2789
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • March 7, 1989
    ...there was here, that the state was unable to more narrowly frame the time in which the offenses occurred. Similarly, in Knight v. State, 506 So.2d 1182 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), there was no finding that the state made a good faith effort to narrow the eight-year time frame alleged. The court di......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 cases
  • State v. Ambrosia, No. L-88-058
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Ohio)
    • May 4, 1990
    ...In support of his argument, appellant relies on Ohio case law and cases from other jurisdictions, namely, Knight v. State (Fla.App.1987), 506 So.2d 1182; People v. MacAfee (1980), 76 App.Div.2d 157, 431 N.Y.S.2d 149; and United States v. Parente (D.Conn.1978), 449 F.Supp. In order to determ......
  • State v. Theriault, Nos. 90-1353
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • December 5, 1991
    ...So.2d 1181 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986) overruled our prior decisions of Goble v. State, 535 So.2d 706 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988) and Knight v. State, 506 So.2d 1182 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). Because of our holding, we are not required to address this argument, but we do note that Tingley involved an informatio......
  • State v. Dell'Orfano, No. 90-0955
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • January 8, 1992
    ...considered Goble v. State, 535 So.2d 706 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988), State v. Garcia, 511 So.2d 714 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), and Knight v. State, 506 So.2d 1182 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), in concluding that a dismissal of an information under these circumstances is required. Although we would not normally go......
  • State v. Jones, No. 87-2789
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • March 7, 1989
    ...there was here, that the state was unable to more narrowly frame the time in which the offenses occurred. Similarly, in Knight v. State, 506 So.2d 1182 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), there was no finding that the state made a good faith effort to narrow the eight-year time frame alleged. The court di......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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