CHARLES SMITH, APPELLANT,

v.

THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Greger v. State, 458 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
  …n for the purposes of the burglary statute between entering the passenger compartment of a conveyance and entering the engine compartment, Bragg v. State, supra, or between entering the engine compartment of a hoodless automobile, Anderson v. State, 415 So. 2d 829 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), and entering from underneath the engine compartment, or from the top or from the side. State v. Harvey, supra. This case is similar to State v. Harvey, supra, wherein the defendant entered from underneath the motor vehicle and be…
• Braswell v. State, 671 So. 2d 228 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
  …use there was no entry. In State v. Hankins, 376 So. 2d 285 (Fla. 5th DCA 1979), the court determined that stealing hubcaps did not establish burglary of a conveyance, because there was no entry. In contrast, the Third District in Anderson v. State, 415 So. 2d 829 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), held that lifting a radiator from an engine compartment of a vehicle lacking a hood did constitute burglary of a conveyance, because the statute requires entry of only a portion of the defendant’s body into the vehicle. Similarly…
• R.B. Owen Zipperer v. State, 481 So. 2d 991 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)
  …iphoned gasoline from an automobile gas tank. R.E.S. v. State, 396 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). On the other hand, courts have held that an entry exists when the defendant removed a radiator from a hoodless engine compartment, Anderson v. State, 415 So. 2d 829 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); and where the defendant was found underneath an automobile removing a starter, State v. Harvey, 403 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). These last two decisions are distinguishable from the instant case because, as noted in Anderson,…