Simmons v. State, 88-1852
| Citation | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2609,551 So.2d 607 |
| Decision Date | 09 November 1989 |
| Docket Number | No. 88-1852,88-1852 |
| Parties | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2609 Hildagarde SIMMONS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
A.A. McClanahan, Jr., Sanford, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Pamela D. Cichon, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.
The defendant appeals an order withholding adjudication of guilt and placing her on probation, entered pursuant to a plea of nolo contendere, for robbery, section 812.13, Florida Statutes, claiming error in the denial of her motion to dismiss 1 the information.
The undisputed facts are that the defendant hid certain merchandise on her person and left a department store without paying for such merchandise. The defendant was stopped outside the store and escorted back inside by two store employees. Once inside, the defendant removed the merchandise from her person and threw it to the floor. The defendant was then instructed to accompany the two store employees to the store's security office. Only then did the defendant begin to resist and she struggled with one of the employees.
The legislature amended section 812.13(1), (3)(b), Florida Statutes (1987) effective October 1, 1987, to provide, in sum, that in robbery, the force used in the course of taking property may be subsequent to the taking if the force "and the act of taking constitute a continuous series of acts or events." In Rumph v. State, 544 So.2d 1150 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989), the defendant used force as he fled with stolen jeans and his conviction of robbery was affirmed on the basis of the amended statute. Here, however, the taking was completed without any use of force and the property abandoned before any force was employed. There was no relationship between the force used and the taking as required by the statute. See State v. Baker, 540 So.2d 847 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).
These undisputed facts do not establish a robbery but do establish the necessarily lesser included offense of petit theft. See J.C.B. v. State, 512 So.2d 1073 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), rev. denied, 520 So.2d 586 (1988). The defendant's motion to dismiss then was more correctly in the nature of a motion for reduction of the charged offense and to that extent should have been granted. See State v. Smulowitz, 482 So.2d 1388 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), pet. for rev. dism., 486 So.2d 587 (Fla.1986) (). The order is hereby...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rockmore v. State
...arguably a fact that distinguishes this case. On the other side of the coin are cases like Baker, 540 So.2d 847, and Simmons v. State, 551 So.2d 607 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989), wherein the courts held, as a matter of law, that the chain of events was broken by “abandonment” of the stolen property,......
-
Wolf v. State, 95-898
...See State v. Rodriquez, 500 So.2d 120, 122 (Fla.1986); Sullivan v. State, 631 So.2d 1142 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Simmons v. State, 551 So.2d 607, 608 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). It would follow that, as with robbery, see Rodriquez, 500 So.2d at 122; J.C.B. v. State, 512 So.2d 1073, 1074 (Fla. 1st DCA......
-
State v. Wright, s. 90-1401
...cert. denied, 488 U.S. 871, 109 S.Ct. 183, 102 L.Ed.2d 153 (1988); State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986); Simmons v. State, 551 So.2d 607 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Gilbert v. State, 547 So.2d 246, 249 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989), review denied, 557 So.2d 35 (Fla.1990); State v. Baker, 540 So.2d 8......
-
Rockmore v. State
...any use of force and abandoned the property before he used force to flee from the security guards.” Id. Similarly, in Simmons v. State, 551 So.2d 607 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989), the Fifth District held that the defendant's robbery conviction could not stand. There, the undisputed facts established......