Thompson v. State, 1D13–5148.
| Decision Date | 15 January 2015 |
| Docket Number | No. 1D13–5148.,1D13–5148. |
| Citation | 153 So.3d 996 (Mem) |
| Parties | Ned Carmer THOMPSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender; Glen P. Gifford and Joanna Aurica Mauer, Assistant Public Defenders, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Virginia Chester Harris, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
The Appellant, Ned Carmer Thompson, appeals his judgment and sentence for the following counts: (1) felony battery—domestic battery by strangulation; (2) false imprisonment; (3) tampering with a witness, victim, or informant; (4) felony battery—repeat offender; (5) tampering with a witness, victim, or informant; and (6) perjury in an official proceeding. He raises five issues on appeal, only one of which merits discussion. The Appellant argues that the trial court committed reversible error when it denied his motion for judgment of acquittal because the State failed to present any evidence required for a conviction for witness tampering under count three. The State concedes error, and we agree.
Under Florida law, tampering with a witness, victim, or informant occurs when:
There is no evidence in the record establishing that the victim was attempting to contact law enforcement during the time of the incident. As such, there was insufficient evidence as to an essential element of the crime. See Longwell v. State, 123 So.3d 1197, 1198 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). Accordingly, the Appellant's conviction for witness tampering under count three must be REVERSED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McCloud v. State
...for this interpretation; rather, the First District merely applied its earlier reading of the statute. Id. (citing Thompson v. State , 153 So.3d 996, 997 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) ). The court reasoned that the victim's testimony that she was "trying to call somebody" when the defendant broke her......
-
Williams v. State
...contact law enforcement at the time of the incident. See McCray v. State, 171 So.3d 831, 833 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) ; Thompson v. State, 153 So.3d 996, 997 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) ; Longwell v. State, 123 So.3d 1197, 1198 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). However, Mr. Williams acknowledges that in McCloud v. S......
-
Frazier v. State
...The appellant cited to this Court's opinions in McCray v. State , 171 So.3d 831, 832 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) ; Thompson v. State , 153 So.3d 996, 997 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) ; and Longwell v. State , 123 So.3d 1197, 1198 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). The facts of the cases in Longwell , Thompson , and McCra......
-
McCloud v. State
...commission of the criminal offense. Mr. McCloud observes that the First District's decision in McCray, which relied on Thompson v. State, 153 So.3d 996 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015), and Longwell v. State, 123 So.3d 1197 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013), is squarely on point. In all three cases, the First Distric......