State v. Pasko, 2D01-253.
| Decision Date | 03 April 2002 |
| Docket Number | No. 2D01-253.,2D01-253. |
| Citation | 815 So.2d 680 |
| Parties | STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Paul PASKO, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Ha T. Dao, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellant.
Donald P. Day, of Berry, Day & McFee, Naples, for Appellant.
The State challenges the circuit court's order dismissing the information against Paul Pasko. The information charged Pasko with seventy-seven counts of possession of child pornography, in violation of section 827.071(5), Florida Statutes (1999). We reverse.
The charges arose when Pasko was found to be in possession of seventy-seven photographs of nude female children. In response to the charges, Pasko filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(c)(4). He alleged that based on the undisputed facts set forth in his motion, the State would be unable to establish a prima facie case because the pictures did not violate Florida law. The State acknowledged that the facts were undisputed but argued that the pictures did depict "sexual conduct" and thus did violate the statute. The trial judge reviewed the photographs and granted the motion to dismiss. In doing so, he made specific findings that the pictures, as a matter of law, did not depict sexual conduct. The State appeals that order.
On a motion to dismiss, the State is required only to show a prima facie case. State v. Hunwick, 446 So.2d 214 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). Furthermore, the State is entitled to the most favorable construction of the evidence, and all inferences should be resolved against the defendant. Id. "In sum, only where the most favorable construction to the state would not establish a prima facie case of guilt should a Rule 3.190(c)(4) ... motion to dismiss be granted." Id. at 215-16.
The purpose of a motion to dismiss is to allow a pretrial determination of the law of the case when the facts are not in dispute. Styron v. State, 662 So.2d 965 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). Accordingly, the standard of our review of the trial court's order is de novo.
We recognize that nudity alone does not constitute sexual conduct. See Schmitt v. State, 590 So.2d 404, 409 (Fla. 1991)
. However, our review here reveals that the instant photographs and the inferences drawn therefrom do provide the minimum proof necessary to establish a prima facie case of a violation of section 827.071(1)(g). Accordingly, we...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Gensler
...prima facie case, it should not be prevented from prosecuting. Jalbert v. State, 906 So.2d 337 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); State v. Pasko, 815 So.2d 680, 681 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)(citing State v. Hunwick, 446 So.2d 214, 215 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)). A motion to dismiss should rarely be granted, State v. ......
-
Lane v. Mra Holdings, LLC
...The exposure of Lane's breast did not constitute sexual conduct as that term is defined by this statute. See State v. Pasko, 815 So.2d 680 (Fla. 2nd DCA 2002) ("nudity alone does not constitute sexual conduct"). Accordingly, the publication of Lane's image and likeness in Girls Gone Wild fa......
-
State v. Brabson
... ... The court granted the motion and dismissed all nineteen counts. We review this matter de novo. See State v ... 7 So.3d 1121 ... Pasko, 815 So.2d 680, 681 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) ... In criminal cases, motions to dismiss should be granted as sparingly as motions for ... ...
-
State v. Reyan
...the prosecution in this case is barred by the five-year statute of limitations. We review this question of law de novo.State v. Pasko, 815 So.2d 680 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). The trial court based its determination in part on O'Malley v. Mounts, 590 So.2d 437 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). In O'Malley, the......