T.S.S. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

T.S.S. v. State

696 So. 2d 820, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 2404, 1997 WL 115385

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 14, 1997

DocketNos. 95-03329, 95-03450

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 696 So. 2d 820 (T.S.S. 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

T.S.S. v. State, 696 So. 2d 820, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 2404, 1997 WL 115385 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

T.S.S. and T. J. appeal the final order withholding adjudication for disorderly conduct and the order of community control. We reverse because there was insufficient evidence of disorderly conduct, thus, rendering the sentencing issue moot.

The only evidence the state presented was the testimony of a sheriffs deputy, who responded to a loud party behind an apartment building. The deputy’s testimony did not support a determination that the boys violated section 877.03, Florida Statutes (1993). The deputy did not hear either boy say anything in particular. The deputy testified that they continued to “hoot and holler and carry on and scream at us and of course make fun of the police.” He did not testify that the boys said anything to incite the other people who were at the party; they only encouraged them to “hoot and holler.”

We conclude that the trial court should have granted the defense’s motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of the state’s case. See State v. Saunders, 339 So.2d 641, 643 (Fla.1976) (prosecution under section 877.03 allowed only when defendant uses “ ‘fighting words’ or words like shouts of ‘fire’ in a crowded theatre”). See also C.P. v. State, 644 So.2d 600, 601 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (evidence insufficient to support a conviction for disorderly conduct where defendant became loud and verbally abusive which disturbed motel occupants). Furthermore, neither T.S.S. nor T.J. did anything to interfere with the deputy’s duties. They were just annoying and loud. Under Gonzales v. City of Belle Glade, 287 So.2d 669, 670 (Fla.1973), that is not enough to convict them of disorderly conduct.

Reversed and remanded with directions to the trial court to enter a judgment of acquittal for the defense.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and FRANK and PARKER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

T.S.S. and T. J. appeal the final order withholding adjudication for disorderly conduct and the order of community control. We reverse because there was insufficient evidence of disorderly conduct, thus, rendering the sentencing issue moot.

The only evidence the state presented was the testimony of a sheriffs deputy, who responded to a loud party behind an apartment building. The deputy’s testimony did not support a determination that the boys violated section 877.03, Florida Statutes (1993). The deputy did not hear either boy say anything in particular. The deputy testified that they continued to “hoot and holler and carry on and scream at us and of course make fun of the police.” He did not testify that the boys said anything to incite the other people who were at the party; they only encouraged them to “hoot and holler.”

We conclude that the trial court should have granted the defense’s motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of the state’s case. See State v. Saunders, 339 So.2d 641, 643 (Fla.1976) (prosecution under section 877.03 allowed only when defendant uses “ ‘fighting words’ or words like shouts of ‘fire’ in a crowded theatre”). See also C.P. v. State, 644 So.2d 600, 601 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (evidence insufficient to support a conviction for disorderly conduct where defendant became loud and verbally abusive which disturbed motel occupants). Furthermore, neither T.S.S. nor T.J. did anything to interfere with the deputy’s duties. They were just annoying and loud. Under Gonzales v. City of Belle Glade, 287 So.2d 669, 670 (Fla.1973), that is not enough to convict them of disorderly conduct.

Reversed and remanded with directions to the trial court to enter a judgment of acquittal for the defense.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and FRANK and PARKER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

696 So. 2d 820, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 2404, 1997 WL 115385, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tss-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack