Hrindich v. State
This text of 427 So. 2d 212 (Hrindich v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Appellant appeals from his convictions for attempted sexual battery and false imprisonment.
We affirm the judgment as to attempted sexual battery but reverse the judgment of conviction for false imprisonment.
In Faison v. State, 426 So.2d 963 (Fla.1983), the supreme court approved of the following test to determine whether the detention of a victim of a sexual battery also constitutes a separate crime of kidnapping: 1
[I]f a taking or confinement is alleged to have been done to facilitate the commission of another crime, to be kidnapping the resulting movement or confinement:
(a) Must not be slight, inconsequential and merely incidental to the other crime;
(b) Must not be of the kind inherent in the nature of the other crime; and
(c) Must have some significance independent of the other crime in that it makes the other crime substantially easier of commission or substantially lessens the risk of detection.
426 So.2d at 965.
The victim in the case before us voluntarily accompanied appellant in his automobile. Until the attempted sexual battery commenced, the victim had made no attempt to leave and was not restrained. While she was confined in the front seat of the car during the course of the event, all confinement was incidental to the attempted sexual battery. See Simpkins v. State, 395 So.2d 625 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Friend v. State, 385 So.2d 696 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980).
AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED in part.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
427 So. 2d 212, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 19111, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hrindich-v-state-fladistctapp-1983.