LUIS GARCIA BLANCO A/K/A LUIS GARCIA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Luis Garcia Blanco appeals three criminal convictions (two counts of attempted first degree murder and one count of aggravated assault) arising from a shooting incident with police. The appellate court affirms the convictions, rejecting arguments that evidence regarding his companion was inadmissible and that insufficient evidence supported the attempted murder charges.
The court held that the companion-related evidence was relevant and admissible to give the jury an intelligible account of the entire criminal episode, and that sufficient evidence supported the attempted first degree murder convictions because both elements were present: intent to commit first degree murder and an overt act designed to effectuate that intent going beyond mere preparation.
[1] Evidence concerning a defendant's companion at the time of arrest is admissible if it explains the circumstances of the criminal episode and the ensuing events.
[2] Evidence is relevant and admissible if it tends to show the defendant's actions were motivated by a desire to facilitate a companion's escape from police.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“This evidence tended to show that the defendant's companion was wanted by the police on outstanding arrest warrants, that certain preparations were made to effect that person's arrest, that the police pursued the car driven by the defendant herein because the defendant's companion was a passenger in the car, and that the defendant attempted to flee and shot at the police in order to make good his companion's escape.”
Establishes the relevance of evidence regarding the defendant's companion to explain the context and motivation for the shooting incident.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePolice pursued a car driven by defendant Garcia because his passenger companion was wanted on outstanding arrest warrants. During the pursuit, Garcia …
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 Criminal Episode cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendant Luis Garcia Blanco a/k/a Luis Garcia appeals three criminal convictions and sentences entered against him on two counts of attempted first degree murder with a firearm [§§ 782.04, 775.087, 777.04, Fla.Stat. (1981)] and one count of aggravated assault [§ 784.021, Fla.Stat. (1981)]. He raises two points on appeal: (1) that the trial court erred in allowing in evidence “testimony concerning the individual with whom the defendant was with at the time of his arrest” [appellant’s brief at 12], and (2) that the trial court erred in “denying the defendant’s motion for a judgment of acquittal as to the first two counts of the information [the attempted first degree murder counts]” [appellant’s brief at 22]. We disagree and affirm.
First, we think the evidence which the defendant complains of on this appeal, to wit: police testimony “concerning the individual with whom the defendant was with at the time of his arrest,” was relevant and admissible at trial. This evidence tended to show that the defendant’s companion was wanted by the police on outstanding arrest warrants, that certain preparations were made to effect that person’s arrest, that the police pursued the car driven by the defendant herein because the defendant’s companion was a passenger in the car, and that the defendant attempted to flee and shot at the police in order to make good his companion’s escape.
The evidence was relevant, we think, to give the jury an intelligible account of the entire criminal episode and ensuing gun battle from which the crimes charged herein arose. We see no error in the admission of the complained-of evidence. See Williams v. State, 110 So. 2d 654, 658 (Fla.), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 847, 80 S.Ct. 102, 4 L.Ed.2d 86 (1959); Jacobson v. State, 375 So. 2d 1133 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 385 So. 2d 758 (Fla.1980); §§ 90.401, 90.402, Fla.Stat. (1981).
Second, we think that sufficient evidence was adduced below to sustain the attempted first degree murder convictions. According to police testimony, the defendant fired his gun once at relatively close range (20-25 yards) at two police officers (7-8 feet apart) who were pursuing him. The gunshot missed both officers. Subsequent to this arrest, the defendant told one of the officers that “next time I’ll kill you.” Both elements of attempted first degree murder are present here, to wit: (1) an intent to commit the underlying crime [first degree murder], and (2) an overt act designed to effectuate that intent, carried beyond mere preparation, but falling short of executing the ultimate design. Gustine v. State, 86 Fla. 24, 97 So. 207 (1923); Groneau v. State, 201 So. 2d 599 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967).
The fact that one shot, rather than two, was fired at two pursuing officers cannot by the weight of authority change this result. State v. Temple, 394 So. 2d 259 (La.1981); People v. Bigsby, 52 Ill.App.3d 277, 9 Ill.Dec. 924, 367 N.E. 2d 358 (1977); People v. Mimms, 40 Ill.App.3d 942, 353 N.E. 2d 186 (App.Ct.1976); Annot., 8 A.L.R.4th 960 (1981).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Johnson v. State, 888 So. 2d 691 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)…was chasing him); Kelly v. State, 552 So. 2d 206, 207 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989) (holding that pointing weapon into vehicle and then firing shots at victim inside the vehicle sufficient for attempted first-degree murder conviction); Blanco v. [*693] State, 447 So. 2d 939, 940 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (finding evidence that defendant pointed gun at officers, fired a shot from 20-25 yards away towards these officers, and after being apprehended remarked that, “next time I’ll kill you,” sufficient to sustain attempted first-…
-
State v. Escobar, 570 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…t Officer Estefan to keep his brother out of jail. Without this evidence, the jury would be left to wonder why defendants would flee from and shoot Officer Estefan, who was stopping the defendants for a simple traffic violation. See Blanco v. State, 447 So. 2d 939 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (in defendant’s trial for attempted first-degree murder, evidence that defendant’s companion was wanted by police was relevant and admissible to give jury intelligible account of entire criminal episode from which crimes charged o…
-
Montero v. State, 225 So. 3d 340 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)…inally, Montero told the manager and security guard that he would kill them. Unsurprisingly, the Florida courts have held that a defendant’s statement, “I will kill you,” is evidence of the defendant’s intent to kill the victim. See Blanco v. State, 447 So. 2d 939, 940 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (defendant’s statement, “next time I’ll kill you,” was evidence of intent to commit attempted first degree murder); see also Provenzano v. State, 497 So. 2d 1177, 1181 (Fla. 1986) (finding sufficient evidence of premeditation…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 110 So. 2d 654 (Fla. 1959)
- Williams v. Florida, 361 U.S. 847 (U.S. 1959)
- White v. Illinois, 361 U.S. 847 (U.S. 1959)
- Gustine v. State, 86 Fla. 24 (Fla. 1923)
- Groneau v. State, 201 So. 2d 599 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967)
- Jacobson v. State, 375 So. 2d 1133 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)