S.G. v. State
Decision Date | 28 June 2018 |
Docket Number | 1D17–3603,1D17–3604,1D17–3605,1D17–3597,1D17–3596,1D17–3598 (Consolidated for disposition),Nos. 1D17–3602,s. 1D17–3602 |
Citation | 250 So.3d 775 |
Parties | S.G., a child, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and John W. Hedrick, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Heather Flanagan Ross, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
S.G., who attacked and injured her father with a 6–8? shard of broken mirror glass and smashed a picture frame over his head all while threatening to kill him, challenges her conviction for aggravated battery with a deadly weapon, claiming the shard did not constitute a deadly weapon because it is not ordinarily considered such a weapon, was not converted into one by its use in this case, and caused only a "scratch" that healed by the time of trial.
Though the aggravated battery statute does not define what constitutes a "deadly weapon," it has been judicially defined as "1) any instrument which, when used in the ordinary manner contemplated by its design and construction will or is likely to cause great bodily harm, or 2) any instrument likely to cause great bodily harm because of the way it is used during a crime." Smith v. State , 969 So.2d 452, 454–55 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) (quoting V.M.N. v. State, 909 So.2d 953, 954 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) ). While a piece of broken glass, whether a mirror, a window, or a beer bottle, may not ordinarily be a deadly weapon by itself, the context in which the item is used can transform it into one. Cloninger v. State , 846 So.2d 1192 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) ( ); Brown v. State , 787 So.2d 58 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) ( ); see also State v. Shilling , 77 Wash.App. 166, 889 P.2d 948, 950 (1995) ( ); Harris v. State , 705 So.2d 542, 548 (Ala. Crim. App. 1997) (); Pauls v. State , 476 A.2d 157, 160 (Del. 1984) ( ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
King v. State
...an instrument may not ordinarily be a deadly weapon, the context in which it is used can transform it into one. S.G. v. State , 250 So. 3d 775, 776 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018). Based on the way Appellant used the flounder gig and the context in which it was used, it was a deadly weapon. Appellant a......
-
Thurston v. State, 1D17–2548
...and prepared a report. The court then held a hearing and entered an order finding Thurston competent based on the expert’s report.250 So.3d 775 Thurston’s first argument on appeal is that it was fundamental error to begin the trial without determining his competency. See Zern v. State , 191......