J.F.R. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

J.F.R. v. State

848 So. 2d 344, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 536, 2003 WL 160481

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 24, 2003

DocketNo. 2D01-5244

StatusPublished

This text of 848 So. 2d 344 (J.F.R. 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.

Bluebook

J.F.R. v. State, 848 So. 2d 344, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 536, 2003 WL 160481 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

DAVIS, Judge.

J.F.R. challenges his adjudication of delinquency arguing that the evidence was insufficient to support a finding that he committed aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. We conclude that the record does not support the adjudication of delinquency and reverse.

[345]*345These proceedings arose out of an incident in which J.F.R., his- brother, and a number of other youths drove into the victim’s yard, exited their vehicles, and began “talking trash” to the victim. Several of the youths carried baseball bats, which they displayed in a menacing manner.

The State filed a petition for delinquency, and J.F.R. was adjudicated delinquent based on his being found guilty of aggravated assault with a weapon. However, the record reveals that the victim testified that he did not see J.F.R. carrying a weapon. Moreover, the trial court made a specific finding that J.F.R. did not possess a weapon. As a result, J.F.R.’s adjudication was necessarily premised on his status as a principal.

However, “[t]o be guilty as a principal for a crime physically committed by another, one must intend that the crime be committed and do some act to assist the other person in actually committing the crime.” Watkins v. State, 826 So.2d 471, 474 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). In the instant case, the only evidence of record describing J.F.R.’s actions that evening was the victim’s statement that J.F.R. was “[j]ust standing there with his friends talking trash.” This very general statement does not, without more, establish either that J.F.R. intended that the crime be committed or that he did some act to assist the other person in committing the crime. Because J.F.R. was thus improperly adjudicated delinquent based on this status as a principal, we reverse.

Reversed.

ALTENBERND and NORTHGUTT, JJ., Concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

DAVIS, Judge.

J.F.R. challenges his adjudication of delinquency arguing that the evidence was insufficient to support a finding that he committed aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. We conclude that the record does not support the adjudication of delinquency and reverse.

[345]*345These proceedings arose out of an incident in which J.F.R., his- brother, and a number of other youths drove into the victim’s yard, exited their vehicles, and began “talking trash” to the victim. Several of the youths carried baseball bats, which they displayed in a menacing manner.

The State filed a petition for delinquency, and J.F.R. was adjudicated delinquent based on his being found guilty of aggravated assault with a weapon. However, the record reveals that the victim testified that he did not see J.F.R. carrying a weapon. Moreover, the trial court made a specific finding that J.F.R. did not possess a weapon. As a result, J.F.R.’s adjudication was necessarily premised on his status as a principal.

However, “[t]o be guilty as a principal for a crime physically committed by another, one must intend that the crime be committed and do some act to assist the other person in actually committing the crime.” Watkins v. State, 826 So.2d 471, 474 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). In the instant case, the only evidence of record describing J.F.R.’s actions that evening was the victim’s statement that J.F.R. was “[j]ust standing there with his friends talking trash.” This very general statement does not, without more, establish either that J.F.R. intended that the crime be committed or that he did some act to assist the other person in committing the crime. Because J.F.R. was thus improperly adjudicated delinquent based on this status as a principal, we reverse.

Reversed.

ALTENBERND and NORTHGUTT, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

848 So. 2d 344, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 536, 2003 WL 160481, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jfr-v-state-fladistctapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack