State v. Speights

437 So. 2d 1387, 1983 Fla. LEXIS 2948
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided September 15, 1983·No. No. 62519·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

SHAW, Justice.

This cause is before the Court on petition to review the decision of the district court of appeal in State v. Speights, 417 So.2d 1168 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). The district court affirmed a trial court order dismissing an information charging burglary under section 810.02, Florida Statutes (1981), for failure to charge the intent to commit a specific offense as part of the burglary charge. In reaching this decision, the district court certified a question of great public importance:

In a prosecution for burglary under section 810.02, Florida Statutes (1981), is it necessary for the State to allege an intent to commit a specific offense?

Id. at 1169. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

The certified question is identical to that which we have since answered in the negative. State v. Waters, 436 So.2d 66 (Fla.1983). The information, however, must allege the essential statutory element of intent to commit an offense. Id. This essential element was properly alleged in the present case.

The decision of the district court of appeal is quashed and the cause is remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

It is so ordered.

ALDERMAN, C.J., and ADKINS, BOYD, OVERTON, McDonald and EHRLICH, JJ., concur.

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

State v. Speights, 437 So. 2d 1387, 1983 Fla. LEXIS 2948 (Fla. 1983).

437 So. 2d 1387 (State v. Speights) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Salas v. State
544 So. 2d 1040 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
State v. Barnes
441 So. 2d 626 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1983)