JOHN ROBESON TURNER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Turner was charged as a principal in the first degree for aiding and abetting another person (Kelly) to commit solicitation to commit burglary. After Kelly was acquitted of the underlying solicitation charge, Turner moved to dismiss his charge. The court reversed Turner's conviction, holding that once the principal is acquitted, the state is barred from convicting an aider and abettor of the same offense because a necessary element of principal-in-the-first-degree liability has ceased to exist.
The court held that Turner cannot be convicted as a principal in the first degree because Kelly's acquittal on the underlying solicitation charge destroys a necessary element of Turner's liability. Under Florida Statute 777.011 (1974), conviction as a principal in the first degree for aiding, abetting, counseling, or otherwise procuring a crime requires that the underlying crime be actually committed or attempted to be committed. Since Kelly was acquitted, this prerequisite element no longer exists.
[1] A person charged as a principal in the first degree for aiding, abetting, counseling, hiring, or otherwise procuring a criminal offense cannot be convicted if the person…
[2] The acquittal of a person charged with solicitation estops the state from prosecuting another person as a principal in the first degree to the same solicitation offense.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“By adding the underscored words in the 1974 statute the Legislature has made it as a prerequisite to a conviction for being a principal in the first degree to a crime of aiding, abetting, counseling, hiring or otherwise procuring such crime to be committed by another person, that such other person must have committed or attempted to commit such crime.”
Establishes that the statutory language creates an essential prerequisite that the underlying offense must be committed or attempted to be committed
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTurner was charged in Count II of an amended information as a principal in the first degree to the crime of solicitation to commit burglary of a conve…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Principal In The First Degree cases and more on FLexlaw
MASON (Retired), Associate Judge.
This is an appeal from a judgment and sentence entered and imposed in the Circuit Court of Escambia County by the Honorable Ervin Fleet, Circuit Judge.
We reverse. Appellant Turner was charged in Count II of an amended information with the crime of principal in the first degree to the criminal offense of solicitation. In such count it was charged that the appellant “did aid, abet, counsel or otherwise procure as a principal in the first degree, the commission of a felony, to wit: Solicitation to Commit Burglary of a Conveyance ... in that the said John Robinson Turner did aid, abet counsel or otherwise procure one Teddy Warren Kelly to unlawfully solicit another, to wit: Mitchell McNeil to enter or remain in a certain conveyance, to wit: The State Vehicle of Florida Department of Criminal Law Enforcement Special Agent M. R. Cornelius, with the intent to commit an offense therein, to wit: Grand Larceny . . . ”.
Count I of the amended information charged Kelly with the crime of solicitation of McNeil to commit the crime of burglary of the conveyance described in Count II with the same intent as referred to in such Count II. The two counts were severed for trial purpose and on November 21, 1977, Kelly was tried under the first count by a jury and found not guilty and later adjudicated not guilty by the court. Following such acquittal of Kelly, Turner moved the court to dismiss Count II against him on the ground that Kelly having been acquitted under Count I, the State was estopped to try him as a principal in the first degree to the same offense. We agree.
Appellant was charged as a principal in the first degree under the provisions of F.S. 777.011 (1977). This statute was enacted in 1974 (Chapter 74-383) and defines a principal in the first degree as follows:
“Principal in first degree. — Whoever commits any criminal offense against the state, whether felony or misdemeanor, or aids, abets, counsels, hires, or otherwise procures such offense to be committed, and such offense is committed or is attempted to be committed, is a principal in the first degree and may be charged, convicted, and punished as such, whether he is or is not actually or constructively present at the commission of such offense.” (Emphasis supplied)
Prior to the enactment of the 1974 statute the underscored words were not included in the statute defining a principal in the first degree but such prior statute enacted in 1957 was merely a statute replacing the former accessory before the fact statute.
By adding the underscored words in the 1974 statute the Legislature has made it as a prerequisite to a conviction for being a principal in the first degree to a crime of aiding, abetting, counseling, hiring or otherwise procuring such crime to be committed by another person, that such other person must have committed or attempted to commit such crime. Since Kelly was acquitted of the crime of solicitation as charged in Count I of the information, a necessary element of the crime of principal in the first degree by aiding, abetting, counseling, hiring or otherwise procuring charged against appellant has ceased to exist. Therefore, appellant cannot later be charged and convicted of the crime of principal in the first degree to the crime of solicitation.
Appellant’s judgment of conviction and sentence imposed thereupon is hereby reversed and he is hereby discharged therefrom.
MILLS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Eaton v. State, 438 So. 2d 822 (Fla. 1983)…EHRLICH, Justice. Petitioners Eaton and Gombos request review of the decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Eaton v. State, 410 So. 2d 933 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), on grounds of direct and express conflict with Turner v. State, 369 So. 2d 670 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), disapproved, Potts v. State, 430 So. 2d 900 (Fla.1982), and Boyd v. State, 389 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980), pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3) of the Florida Constitution. Gombos and Dawn Sobel undertook to help Eaton esc…
-
Potts v. State, 430 So. 2d 900 (Fla. 1982)…At issue is whether or not an aider or.abettor to the substantive crime may be convicted of a greater crime than his confederate/principal. The decision under review, Potts v. State, 403 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981), conflicts with Turner v. State, 369 So. 2d 670 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). We affirm Potts and disapprove Turner. Petitioner and one Lawrence Scott Ramirez participated in the burglary of a Clearwater car dealer. Ramirez actually conducted the burglary during which he placed his hand on an employee, g…
-
Potts v. State, 403 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)…pellant was then tried, found guilty as charged, and sentenced to thirty years in prison. Appellant first contends that he could be convicted of no offense greater than that of which his confederate was found guilty. He relies upon Turner v. State, 369 So. 2d 670 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), which held that one could not be convicted on a charge that he “did aid, abet, counsel or otherwise procure” the commission of a felony by another when the person he was charged with aiding had already been acquitted of the felo…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence