Spencer v. State
| Decision Date | 20 June 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. P--97,P--97 |
| Citation | 263 So.2d 282 |
| Parties | Tom SPENCER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Law Offices of Willard E. Parsons, Jacksonville, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Joseph DeMember, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Appellant seeks reversal of a conviction of possessing a narcotic drug commonly known as marijuana.
Appellant and his roommate had an apartment on the beach at St. Augustine. The apartment was used by numerous friends for changing clothes after swimming and there were frequent overnight visitors. One John LaGrosse, 'practically lived there', and it was he who initially placed the marijuana in the closet of the apartment. About a block from the apartment is a bar where an undercover agent, Thompson, hung out, drinking beer and meeting people who would eventually give her information about drug sources. Appellant saw Mrs. Thompson sitting at a table, bought her a beer and invited her to his apartment. Once at the apartment, they drank wine and discussed marijuana.
Appellant's roommate indicated that John LaGrosse had left some marijuana in the apartment and proceeded to get it out of the closet. Finding that there was no available means of smoking the marijuana, Mrs. Thompson volunteered to go to the store to buy cigarette papers. Appellant's roommate drove her to a nearby store where she bought the papers with money supplied by the State. They went back to the apartment and rolled two marijuana cigarettes. One of the cigarettes was smoked at the apartment and Mrs. Thompson took the other one with her. Subsequently, appellant was arrested and found guilty of possessing marijuana.
One of the points raised by appellant on this appeal is the issue of entrapment. The law on entrapment was specifically set out in Lashley v. State, Fla., 67 So.2d 648 (1953), as follows:
'One who is instigated, induced, or lured by an officer of the law or other person, for the purpose of prosecution, into the commission of a crime which he had otherwise no intention of committing may avail himself of the defense of
We believe that in the case sub judice the law enforcement agent provided more than an opportunity to commit a crime. First, there is an inherent inducement associated with allowing a female agent to be picked up in a bar and to accompany a man to his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bauer v. State, 86-753
...by Cardwell's conduct furnishing an opportunity to commit the offense. See Lashley v. State, 67 So.2d 648 (Fla.1953); Spencer v. State, 263 So.2d 282 (Fla.App. 1st, 1972). On December 1, 1973, agent Cardwell approached Kimmons pursuant to plan and asked to buy drugs. Cardwell and other agen......
-
United States v. Hayes
...a defendant, and the offer of illicit consideration as well as money by a female informant for an unlawful sale. See also Spencer v. State, 263 So.2d 282 (Fla. App.), cert. denied, 267 So.2d 835 (Fla.). We feel that reliance on the cases is First, our record shows no conduct by government a......
-
State v. Brider
...courts have recognized that entrapment can exist as a matter of law. Smith v. State, 320 So.2d 420 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975); Spencer v. State, 263 So.2d 282 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972). Appellee's argument for entrapment in the trial court and here is that the state supplied him with the very contraband ......
-
State v. Sokos, 82-153
...courts have recognized that entrapment can exist as a matter of law, Smith v. State, 320 So.2d 420 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975), Spencer v. State, 263 So.2d 282 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972), intent or state of mind (i.e. predisposition) is not an issue to be decided on a motion to dismiss under Rule 3.190(c)(......