BANDY BERNARD PEOPLES, 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.
Bandy Bernard Peoples was convicted of first-degree burglary after police discovered him fleeing a building with a pistol in his waistband. The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the evidence sufficiently demonstrated Peoples was armed with a dangerous weapon in the course of committing the burglary, satisfying the statutory requirement for a first-degree felony.
The court held that the evidence sufficiently showed appellant was armed with a dangerous weapon while in flight after the burglary, satisfying the statutory requirement for first-degree burglary. The pistol was in appellant's possession prior to arrest, and the jury could reasonably conclude he had it while fleeing the building.
[1] Burglary is a first-degree felony if the offender makes an assault upon any person or is armed with a dangerous weapon in the course of committing the offense.
[2] The phrase "in the course of committing" the offense of burglary includes acts occurring in flight after the commission of the offense.
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“An act is committed "in the course of committing" if it occurs in an attempt to commit the offense or in flight after the attempt or commission.”
Statutory definition of 'in the course of committing' that encompasses flight after the burglary, supporting the first-degree felony conviction.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTampa police officer Williams responded to a silent burglar alarm at 904 East Platt Street around 10:45 p.m. and observed a man (later identified as a…
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.
GRIMES, Acting Chief Judge.
Appellant was properly convicted of burglary. The only serious question involved is whether the state proved appellant guilty of that aspect of burglary constituting a first degree felony.
Tampa police officer Williams answered a silent burglar alarm in a building at 904 East Platt Street at about 10:45 p.m. As he approached the scene, he saw a man later identified as appellant run from the back of the property on which the building was located. He observed the appellant get into an automobile and lie down as if to hide. The officer ordered him out of the car. After appellant got out, he took something from his waistband, threw it on the ground, and kicked it away from him. The officer retrieved a .22 caliber pistol from the location where appellant had kicked the object. He then placed appellant under arrest, but as he attempted to handcuff him, the appellant attacked him. In the course of subduing appellant, it became necessary for the officer to shoot him. Scientific evidence effectively demonstrated that it was appellant who had broken into the building.
Section 810.02(2), Florida Statutes (1981), provides:
(2) Burglary is a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life imprisonment or as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084, if, in the course of committing the offense, the offender:
(a) Makes an assault upon any person.
(b) Is armed, or arms himself within such structure, with explosives or a dangerous weapon.
Proof that the burglar committed an assault or was armed with a dangerous weapon in the course of committing the offense is sufficient to convict of a first degree felony. He need not be armed within the structure because that portion of subsection (b) referring to structure contemplates only the unarmed burglar who arms himself once inside.
Section 810.011(3), Florida Statutes (1981), states:
(3) An act is committed “in the course of committing” if it occurs in an attempt to commit the offense or in flight after the attempt or commission.
The evidence sufficiently showed that appellant was armed with a dangerous weapon while he was in flight after the burglary. The jury could have concluded that appellant had the pistol in his waistband as he was running from the building, but in any event, it cannot reasonably be disputed that he had it in his possession at a point prior to the time he was arrested. In view of our holding, we need not decide the more difficult question of whether appellant was still in flight when he assaulted officer Williams following his arrest.
There is no merit in the other points on appeal.
AFFIRMED.
RYDER and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fipps v. State, 553 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)…t occurs in an attempt to commit the offense or in flight after the attempt or commission. The evidence sufficiently showed that the defendant was armed with a dangerous weapon while in flight after commission of the burglary. See Peoples v. State, 436 So. 2d 972 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1983). Also, the three-year mandatory minimum was properly applied because the defendant “had in his possession” the above referred rifle within the meaning of Section 775.087(2). See Williams v. State, 502 So. 2d 1307 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1…
-
Daigle v. State, 59 So. 3d 1207 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Hardee v. State, 534 So. 2d 706 (Fla.1988); Jones v. State, 599 So. 2d 741 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); and Peoples v. State, 436 So. 2d 972 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). GROSS, C.J., HAZOURI and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.…