NC v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

NC v. State

581 So. 2d 647, 1991 WL 107112

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 19, 1991

Docket90-2050

StatusPublished

This text of 581 So. 2d 647 (NC 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

NC v. State, 581 So. 2d 647, 1991 WL 107112 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

581 So.2d 647 (1991)

In the Interest of N.C., a Child, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 90-2050.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 19, 1991. Rehearing Denied July 19, 1991.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Paul E. Petillo, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

*648 Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and John Tiedemann, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

ON REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

Sua sponte we grant rehearing and substitute the following for our previous opinions:

We reverse appellant's adjudication of delinquency for grand theft of an automobile. Appellant's "mere presence as an after-acquired passenger in a vehicle, with knowledge that it has been stolen, [was] insufficient to convict [him] of [automobile] theft." State v. G.C., 572 So.2d 1380, 1382 (Fla. 1991).

Although section 924.34 of the Florida Statutes (1989) gives an appellate court the authority to direct a trial court to enter judgment for a lesser offense, the supreme court recently held in Gould v. State, 577 So.2d 1302 (Fla. 1991), that the section only applies to category one lesser included offenses.^[1] It rejected the argument that the section also includes category two lesser included offenses.^[2]Id. at 1304. The Schedule of Lesser Included Offenses does not list a category one lesser offense for the charged offense of grand theft third degree. Fla.Std. Jury Instr. (Crim.) 3/89, p. 293. Accordingly, we remand with directions to the trial court to discharge appellant.

REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

DOWNEY, GLICKSTEIN and GARRETT, JJ., concur.

NOTES

[1] Offenses necessarily included in the offense charged, which will include some lesser degrees of offenses. Comment on Schedule of Lesser Included Offenses, Fla.Std. Jury Instr. (Crim.) 3/89, p. 283.

[2] Offenses which may or may not be included in the offense charged, depending on the accusatory pleading and the evidence, which will include all attempts and some lesser degrees of offenses. Comment on Schedule of Lesser Included Offenses, Fla.Std. Jury Instr. (Crim.) 3/89, p. 283.

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

581 So.2d 647 (1991)

In the Interest of N.C., a Child, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 90-2050.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 19, 1991. Rehearing Denied July 19, 1991.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Paul E. Petillo, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

*648 Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and John Tiedemann, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

ON REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

Sua sponte we grant rehearing and substitute the following for our previous opinions:

We reverse appellant's adjudication of delinquency for grand theft of an automobile. Appellant's "mere presence as an after-acquired passenger in a vehicle, with knowledge that it has been stolen, [was] insufficient to convict [him] of [automobile] theft." State v. G.C., 572 So.2d 1380, 1382 (Fla. 1991).

Although section 924.34 of the Florida Statutes (1989) gives an appellate court the authority to direct a trial court to enter judgment for a lesser offense, the supreme court recently held in Gould v. State, 577 So.2d 1302 (Fla. 1991), that the section only applies to category one lesser included offenses.^[1] It rejected the argument that the section also includes category two lesser included offenses.^[2]Id. at 1304. The Schedule of Lesser Included Offenses does not list a category one lesser offense for the charged offense of grand theft third degree. Fla.Std. Jury Instr. (Crim.) 3/89, p. 293. Accordingly, we remand with directions to the trial court to discharge appellant.

REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

DOWNEY, GLICKSTEIN and GARRETT, JJ., concur.

NOTES

[1] Offenses necessarily included in the offense charged, which will include some lesser degrees of offenses. Comment on Schedule of Lesser Included Offenses, Fla.Std. Jury Instr. (Crim.) 3/89, p. 283.

[2] Offenses which may or may not be included in the offense charged, depending on the accusatory pleading and the evidence, which will include all attempts and some lesser degrees of offenses. Comment on Schedule of Lesser Included Offenses, Fla.Std. Jury Instr. (Crim.) 3/89, p. 283.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

581 So. 2d 647, 1991 WL 107112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nc-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.

Opinion

In the Interest of N.C., a Child, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

ON REHEARING

NOTES

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

In the Interest of N.C., a Child, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.