Wood v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Wood v. State

230 So. 2d 484, 1970 Fla. App. LEXIS 7012

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 20, 1970

DocketNo. M-34

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 230 So. 2d 484 (Wood 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

Wood v. State, 230 So. 2d 484, 1970 Fla. App. LEXIS 7012 (Fla. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

SPECTOR, Judge.

Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction in a jury trial on the charge of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon as proscribed by Section 790.23, Florida Statutes, F.S.A. The element of the crime charged which appellant contends was not sufficiently proven was possession. Our review of the record shows that the arresting officers testified that the appellant was arrested around noon in a motel room in Jacksonville. At the time of the arrest, which incidentally was pursuant to a warrant, appellant was found with the gun covered by a pillowcase which, together with the gun, was between appellant’s legs with the gun butt sticking out in view of the arresting officers. Basically, appellant contends that this is not such possession as is contemplated by the statute. We [485]*485disagree. That it was covered fully or partially by a pillowcase renders the gun no less in appellant’s possession than had it been fully concealed in a pocket of his clothing. To come within the purview of the statute, a firearm need not be held in the hands of the accused. It is sufficient to show that the firearm is in the “care, custody, possession or control” of the person charged. Evidence showing the gun to be clutched by the legs of appellant, even though it is partially covered by a pillowcase, fully satisfies the language of the statute. See Maloney v. State, 146 So.2d 581 (Fla.App.1962).

Affirmed.

CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and WIGGINTON, J., concur.

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

SPECTOR, Judge.

Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction in a jury trial on the charge of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon as proscribed by Section 790.23, Florida Statutes, F.S.A. The element of the crime charged which appellant contends was not sufficiently proven was possession. Our review of the record shows that the arresting officers testified that the appellant was arrested around noon in a motel room in Jacksonville. At the time of the arrest, which incidentally was pursuant to a warrant, appellant was found with the gun covered by a pillowcase which, together with the gun, was between appellant’s legs with the gun butt sticking out in view of the arresting officers. Basically, appellant contends that this is not such possession as is contemplated by the statute. We [485]*485disagree. That it was covered fully or partially by a pillowcase renders the gun no less in appellant’s possession than had it been fully concealed in a pocket of his clothing. To come within the purview of the statute, a firearm need not be held in the hands of the accused. It is sufficient to show that the firearm is in the “care, custody, possession or control” of the person charged. Evidence showing the gun to be clutched by the legs of appellant, even though it is partially covered by a pillowcase, fully satisfies the language of the statute. See Maloney v. State, 146 So.2d 581 (Fla.App.1962).

Affirmed.

CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and WIGGINTON, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

230 So. 2d 484, 1970 Fla. App. LEXIS 7012, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wood-v-state-fladistctapp-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack