WILLIAM HENRY FRIEND, 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.
William Henry Friend was convicted of four counts of kidnapping and armed robbery. The Florida First District Court of Appeal reversed the kidnapping convictions, holding that brief confinement incidental to a robbery, without independent significance, does not constitute kidnapping under Florida law.
Kidnapping convictions are reversed. Confinement that is minimal in duration, without significant asportation, and inherent or incidental to the underlying felony of armed robbery, without independent significance, does not constitute kidnapping under Florida law.
[1] Confinement that is inconsequential or inherent in the nature of a related felony is not sufficient to sustain a kidnapping conviction under Florida law.
[2] Kidnapping convictions require proof of confinement, abduction, or imprisonment that is not merely incidental to the commission of another felony.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“we are unable to find any reasonable basis for construing § 787.-01(l)(a)2 as intended to include confinement that is simply inconsequential or inherent in the nature of the related felony”
Establishes the court's core holding that incidental or inconsequential confinement cannot support a kidnapping conviction
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFriend and an accomplice, both armed, committed a robbery in an office building. They forced three employees into a bathroom and ordered them to stay …
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 Robbery With A Firearm cases and more on FLexlaw
WENTWORTH, Judge.
Friend appeals his judgment of conviction for kidnapping (four counts) and robbery with a firearm, and imposition of five 30-year consecutive sentences, each requiring the three-year mandatory minimum to be served. We agree with appellant’s contention that under a proper construction of Florida’s kidnapping statute, the kidnapping convictions should be reversed. § 787.-01, Florida Statutes (1977).
The record evidence shows that appellant and an accomplice, both carrying firearms while committing a robbery in an office building, motioned three employees into a bathroom, commanding them to “stay there.” After a few minutes another employee, who had been required to assist the robbers, was ordered into the bathroom and the door was shut. Within five minutes the employees opened the door and found that the robbers had departed. We conclude that these facts are insufficient to sustain appellant’s kidnapping convictions.
Florida’s kidnapping statute, § 787.01, Florida Statutes, provides in pertinent part that:
(l)(a) “Kidnapping” means forcibly, secretly, or by threat confining, abducting, or imprisoning another person against his will and without lawful authority, with intent to:
**
2. Commit or facilitate commission of any felony.
Although appellant’s actions might be considered within the literal language of the statute, we are unable to find any reasonable basis for construing § 787.-01(l)(a)2 as intended to include confinement that is simply inconsequential or inherent in the nature of the related felony. Accord, Harkins v. State, 380 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). See also, Government of the Virgin Islands v. Berry, 604 F. 2d 221 (3rd Cir. 1979); State v. Buggs, 219 Kan. 203, 547 P. 2d 720 (1976). In the present case the confinement was of minimal duration, without significant asportation or movement, and did not significantly lessen the risk of detection or make the robbery substantially easier to complete than would any alternative forcible restraint essential to the commission of the robbery. The circumstances in this case therefore indicate that the confinement was without independent significance, that it was not materially different from the restraint necessarily involved in the felony of armed robbery, and that it was accordingly not within the intended purview of § 787.01(l)(a)2, Florida Statutes. Appellant’s other contentions present no point of reversible error. The convictions and sentences for kidnapping are reversed and the judgment otherwise affirmed.
ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., and ERVIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (21 total)
-
Faison v. State, 426 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 1983)…lved in sexual battery); Ayendes v. State, 385 So. 2d 698 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 392 So. 2d 1371 (Fla. 1980), (attempted kidnapping affirmed, confinement in victim’s own home with further detention during escape threatened); Friend v. State, 385 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980) (kidnapping reversed, confinement of four employees in a bathroom for approximately five minutes during robbery was without independent significance in that it was not materially different from the restraint necessarily involved…1 / 2
-
Autley Mobley v. State, 409 So. 2d 1031 (Fla. 1982)…ppeal cases which have resolved this dilemma by construing this subsection not to include confinement that is inconsequential or inherent in the nature of the related felony. See Ayendes v. State, 385 So. 2d 698 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Friend v. State, 385 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Harkins v. State, 380 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); See also Bass v. State, 380 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). The prevalent view nationwide is that kidnapping statutes, regardless of their wording, do not apply to unlawful…1 / 2
-
Sorey v. State, 419 So. 2d 810 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…nt interpretation of Florida’s kidnapping statute. See Harkins v. State, 380 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), and its progeny, Carron v. State, 414 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982); Simpkins v. State, 395 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Friend v. State, 385 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); compare Gilley v. State, 412 So. 2d 68 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Faison v. State, 399 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). In Harkins, the court held that tying the victim to the bed where he was sexually assaulted and stabbed to death was…
Previewing 3 of 21 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Mueller v. N. Broward Hosp. Dist., 380 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)
- Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. Warren P. Berry. Appeal of Warren Berry. Appeal of Guillermo Brignoni, 604 F.2d 221 (3d Cir. 1979)