WALLACE JACKSON, 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.
Wallace Jackson appealed his convictions for kidnapping, robbery, and carrying a firearm during a felony. The court affirmed the robbery conviction but reversed the kidnapping and firearm convictions, finding that the minimal movement of the victim across a doorway was insufficient to constitute kidnapping and that recent Supreme Court precedent no longer supported the firearm conviction.
The court affirmed the armed robbery conviction but reversed the kidnapping conviction, holding that the minimal and incidental movement across an open doorway does not constitute the separate crime of kidnapping. The firearm conviction was also reversed based on intervening Supreme Court precedent that receded from prior law.
[1] Movement across a threshold into an open door, which is slight, inconsequential, and merely incidental to a robbery, does not constitute the separate crime of kidnapping.
[2] A conviction for carrying a firearm in the commission of a felony may be reversed based on subsequent Florida Supreme Court precedent that recedes from prior rulings.
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“the movement was slight, inconsequential and merely incidental to the robbery. As such, it does not constitute the separate crime of kidnapping.”
Establishes the court's holding that minimal movement during a robbery does not rise to the level of kidnapping
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTwo individuals approached Mr. Rice at a motel as he was returning to his room and placing his key in the door. They placed a gun to his head and prop…
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 Kidnapping Definition cases and more on FLexlaw
BERANEK, Judge.
Defendant appeals his convictions of kidnapping, robbery, and carrying a firearm in the commission of a felony. We affirm as to the robbery conviction but reverse as to the kidnapping and firearm charge. Although the defendant was also convicted of two other crimes growing out of the same incident, these additional convictions are not raised on appeal.
Mr. Rice and another person were guests at a motel in Broward County. Mr. Rice left the room to get ice and as he returned to the room and placed his key in the door two individuals approached him from the rear, placed a gun to his head, and propelled him through the open door. The two assailants then proceeded to take property from the two occupants and immediately left the room. We find no merit to the appellate attack on the armed robbery conviction. As to kidnapping, the matter is controlled by the Florida Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Faison v. State, 426 So. 2d 963 (Fla.1983). Here we find the undisputed facts show an absence of confinement. The only movement was across the threshold of the open door which Mr. Rice himself was in the act of opening. Despite the fact that the robbery became easier and less detectable inside the room we conclude that the movement was slight, inconsequential and merely incidental to the robbery. As such, it does not constitute the separate crime of kidnapping. The conviction and sentence for kidnapping are reversed and vacated. The conviction and sentence for carrying a firearm in the commission of a felony are also reversed on the authority of Bell v. State, 437 So. 2d 1057 (Fla.1983), which case receded from State v. Monroe, 406 So. 2d 1115 (Fla.1981).
With all respect to the trial court, we point out that the Bell case was not published at the time of this trial.
AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART.
ANSTEAD, C.J., and HURLEY, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Walker v. State, 604 So. 2d 475 (Fla. 1992)…the instant case. We do not believe that the facts of this case fulfill the first prong of the Faison analysis. The limited movement and confinement of the four occupants within the interior of the store were not significant. See Jackson v. State, 436 So. 2d 1101 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). Unlike in Faison, the victims were not dragged from room to room. They were not bound and blindfolded for half an hour as in Marsh v. State, 546 So. 2d 33 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). They were not barricaded inside the bathroom like in…
-
O'Brien v. State, 454 So. 2d 675 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)…arm, appears to be the proper conceptual basis for the recent holdings by the Fourth District Court of Appeal that double jeopardy prohibits convictions of the firearm offense (§ 790.07(2), Fla.Stat.) and its underlying felony, see Jackson v. State, 436 So. 2d 1101 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Bogard v. State, 451 So. 2d 484 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Alvarez v. State, 445 So. 2d 677 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). If by Gibson the Florida Supreme Court has foreclosed its consideration of the problem, then it is perhaps too late, but…
-
Brinson v. State, 483 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)…d to the commission of an armed robbery. Accord, Dowdell v. State, 415 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), pet, for rev. den., 429 So. 2d 5 (Fla.1983) (restaurant employees moved from parking lot to inside restaurant building); contra, Jackson v. State, 436 So. 2d 1101 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983) (victim moved from threshold of motel door to inside motel room; 4th DCA found movement incidental to armed robbery); cf., Sorey v. State, 419 So. 2d 810, 811 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (defendant, in course of armed robbery of fast food…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Faison v. State, 426 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 1983)
- Bell v. State, 437 So. 2d 1057 (Fla. 1983)
- State v. Williams, 406 So. 2d 1115 (Fla. 1981)