ALBERT ROBERTS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1979-05-01
No. 78-1601
Per Curiam
374 So. 2d 1000 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1979) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

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.

Synopsis

Florida appellate court affirmed convictions for aggravated assault, armed burglary, and firearm display, rejecting defendant's claim of fundamental error regarding the information's sufficiency and holding that firearm display is not a lesser included offense of armed burglary.


Holding

Display of a firearm under Florida Statutes § 790.07(2) is not a lesser included offense of burglary with a dangerous weapon because the firearm display charge requires an element not necessary to prove burglary.


Headnotes

[1] Display of a firearm under Florida Statutes § 790.07(2) is not a lesser included offense of burglary with a dangerous weapon when the firearm display charge requires proo…

Previewing 1 of 1 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

Facts & Procedural History

Defendant Roberts was convicted of two counts of aggravated assault, burglary of a dwelling while armed with a sawed-off rifle, and display of a sawed…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

On this appeal from a finding of guilty of two counts of aggravated assault, burglary of a dwelling while armed with a sawed-off rifle-and display of a sawed-off rifle during the commission of a felony, the defendant claims fundamental error in that the information tracks the “aggravated assault” statute, Section 784.021(1), Florida Statutes (1977), but does not allege the elements of the offense of aggravated assault.

The defendant pled to the information and did not, at any time, raise in the trial court the issue which he now presents to this court. The proof of the assault was beyond a reasonable doubt in all of the elements of the assault charged. Accordingly, we decline to consider that point. See Catanese v. State, 251 So. 2d 572 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971); Shifrin v. State, 210 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968); and Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(c).

The second point, addressed to the defendant’s conviction for display of a firearm, see Section 790.07(2), Florida Statutes (1977), claims that this charge was part of the same criminal transaction as that charged in the count for burglary. Inasmuch as the elements that constitute the display of a firearm charge include an allegation not necessary to the proof of the burglary charge, we hold that the displaying of a firearm is not a lesser included offense of burglary with a dangerous weapon. See Brown v. State, 206 So. 2d 377, 383 (Fla.1968).

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Earvin Smith v. State, 211 So. 3d 176 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)
    …e on appeal would represent the rare exception to the general rule that the sufficiency of an indictment or information is not subject to direct review on appeal in the absence of an objection or other challenge in the trial court. Roberts v. State, 374 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Ingraham v. State, 32 So. 3d 761 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); McMillan v. State, 832 So. 2d 946 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); Hart v. State, 761 So. 2d 334 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Carver v. State, 560 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). . This is consis…
  • Jackson v. State, 376 So. 2d 269 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Zuberi v. State, 343 So. 2d 664 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Magueira v. State, 352 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Kimbrough v. State, 356 So. 2d 1294 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Roberts v. State, 374 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); R.Cr.P. 3.380; see: Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694; Mikulovsky v. Schubert, 416 F.Supp. 55 (E.D.Wis.1976).…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw