Rogers v. State

784 So. 2d 470, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 3244, 2001 WL 245734
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Rogers v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 665
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 14, 2001·No. No. 1D00-1372·Published

Opinion

BARFIELD, C. J.

We find that the trial court improperly denied the appellant’s motion for judgment of acquittal on the charge of resisting an officer without violence because under the facts presented, the officer did not have probable cause to arrest the appellant when he handcuffed him and ordered him to divulge the contents of his mouth. Because the officer was not lawfully executing a legal duty, the appellant was entitled to resist the order without violence. Williams v. State, 727 So.2d 1050 (Fla. 2d [471]*471DCA 1999); Mayhue v. State, 659 So.2d 417 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). We reject the state’s argument that this issue, which was considered by the trial judge, was not preserved for appellate review.

The conviction is REVERSED.

ALLEN and BROWNING, JJ., concur.

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

Rogers v. State, 784 So. 2d 470, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 3244, 2001 WL 245734 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

784 So. 2d 470 (Rogers v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Williams v. State
727 So. 2d 1050 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)
Mayhue v. State
659 So. 2d 417 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)