State v. Darst
| Decision Date | 19 December 2002 |
| Docket Number | No. SC02-984.,SC02-984. |
| Citation | 837 So.2d 394 |
| Parties | STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Steven DARST, Respondent. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Richard E. Doran, Attorney General, and Kellie A. Nielan and Anthony J. Golden, Assistant Attorneys General, Daytona Beach, FL, for Petitioner.
James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and James R. Wulchak, Chief, Appellate Division, Assistant Public Defender, Seventh Judicial Circuit, Daytona Beach, FL, for Respondent.
We have for review the decision of the Fifth District Court of Appeal, Darst v. State, 816 So.2d 680 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), both declaring section 784.07 of the Florida Statutes (1999) to be an enhancement statute, and certifying conflict with Mills v. State, 773 So.2d 650 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.
This Court granted review in Mills, and addressed the issue presented here. See Mills v. State, 822 So.2d 1284 (Fla.2002). There we held section 784.07 of the Florida Statutes is a reclassification statute, not an enhancement statute, and thus creates a substantive crime. See id. at 1287. As the district court's holding is inconsistent with this Court's decision in Mills, its decision is quashed and the case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with Mills.
It is so ordered.
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Israel v. State
-
Ramroop v. State
...that it expressly and directly conflicts with this Court's decisions in Wright v. State , 586 So.2d 1024 (Fla. 1991), and State v. Darst , 837 So.2d 394 (Fla. 2002), on whether the crime of attempted murder of a law enforcement officer constitutes a substantive criminal offense. We have jur......
-
Jomolla v. State
...for his act of committing the battery and for his thoughts in committing the battery. This argument is without merit. In State v. Darst, 837 So.2d 394 (Fla. 2002), the Florida Supreme Court explained that the reclassification of an offense based upon the status of the victim does not violat......
-
Darst v. State
...has quashed our decision in Darst v. State, 816 So.2d 680 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), and has remanded the case to this court. State v. Darst, 837 So.2d 394 (Fla.2002). The supreme court's rationale for its decision is explained in Mills v. State, 822 So.2d 1284 Accordingly, we affirm the convicti......
-
Misdemeanor defense
...Reclassification of an offense based upon the status of the victim does not violate double jeopardy principles. [ State v. Darst , 837 So. 2d 394 (Fla. 2002).] §17:201 Evidence/Stipulations To be admissible, evidence must be relevant. [Fla. Stat. §90.402.] Relevant evidence is inadmissible ......