State v. Murray
Opinion
Murray is charged under Section 918.-14(3)(a)1, Florida Statutes (1975), with having caused a witness to be placed in fear. The court dismissed the information because it did not allege the defendant knew that a trial, proceeding or investigation was pending as mentioned in Section 918.14(1), Florida Statutes (1975).1
We agree the information is defective and should be dismissed but not because it fails to allege the matters mentioned in paragraph (1) of the Statute. That paragraph does not apply to paragraphs 3(a)1, 2 and 3 because the Statute is meant to proscribe the tampering with or retaliation against a witness; and a trial, proceeding or investigation may be completed when retaliation is sought or assault is made. In fact, retaliation probably does not occur until after testimony is given and there is something against which to retaliate.
This Statute is different from other assault or battery or threat Statutes in that it requires the alleged victim to be or have been a witness. But many people are witnesses to many things so it must be alleged that the defendant knew the alleged victim was a witness. Some connection between the actions of the defendant and the fact the alleged victim was a witness must also be alleged in order to allege a violation of this Statute which is in effect an enhanced penalty Statute.
The Order of the trial court dismissing the information is affirmed without prejudice to the State to refile a proper information.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
349 So. 2d 707 (State v. Murray) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.