P.P., A JUVENILE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1985-03-26
No. 84-845
Before BARKDULL and HUBBART and NESBITT, JJ.
466 So. 2d 1140 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1985) Negative Treatment
Cited by 21 cases

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.

Synopsis

A juvenile was adjudicated delinquent for obstructing justice by providing false birth dates to a police officer during an arrest. The appellate court reversed, finding insufficient evidence because the juvenile voluntarily corrected the false information before it was recorded in the official arrest report.


Holding

The court reversed the delinquency adjudication, holding that the state failed to establish the essential element that the juvenile knowingly furnished false information where the false birthdates were retracted before the arrest report was completed. A person accused of obstructing justice should be able to retract false information before it is officially recorded or causes harm.


Headnotes

[1] A person obstructs justice by knowingly furnishing false information with the intent to prohibit apprehension or obstruct prosecution or defense.

[2] A juvenile may retract false information provided to law enforcement before it is officially recorded or causes harm, thereby negating an obstruction of justice charge.

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

Key Quotes

“The state, in our view, failed to establish an essential element of this offense, namely, that the juvenile "knowingly ... furnish[ed] false information" by giving, as charged, a false birthdate to the arresting officer.”

Establishes that the state failed to prove the required element of knowingly furnishing false information

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Officer Masterrer stopped and arrested juvenile P.P. for operating a vehicle without a license. During the arrest report process, the officer asked fo…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a juvenile delinquency adjudication, entered below after trial, for the offense of obstructing justice. We reverse based on a finding of insufficient evidence.

The undisputed facts adduced at trial establish that Officer Raphael Masterrer of the City of Miami Police Department stopped a car driven by the juvenile P.P. pursuant to a BOLO. Officer Masterrer arrested the juvenile for operating a motor vehicle without a license and in preparation for filling out the arrest report, inquired as to the juvenile P.P.’s name and birthdate. The juvenile correctly identified himself and stated that his birthdate was in October 1964. As Officer Masterrer was filling out his report, the juvenile P.P. stated, with no prompting from the officer, “No, I’m— that’s not the correct date. It’s this one;” he then stated that his birthdate was in October 1965. While the officer was still talking to the juvenile P.P. and before he had completed his report, the juvenile P.P. stated that his birthdate was October 15, 1966. This latter date was, in fact, the correct birthdate of the juvenile P.P. Officer Masterrer put this correct date of birth in his arrest report and thereafter transported the juvenile P.P. to Youth Hall.

At the conclusion of the trial below, the juvenile P.P., through counsel, moved for a judgment of non-delinquency on the ground that the evidence failed to establish a prima facie case of obstruction of justice in that the juvenile had, in fact, voluntarily corrected any prior false birthdates given to the officer. The motion was denied and the juvenile P.P. was found delinquent as charged. This appeal follows.

The juvenile P.P. was charged with violating Section 21-26(A)(3)(a), Code of Metropolitan Dade County [made a misdemeanor by § 125.69, Fla.Stat.(1983) ], which provides as follows:

“Firemen, policemen, service, execution of process; court order; hindering, obstructing justice.

(A) Prohibitions.

(3) It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly obstruct justice. A person obstructs justice when, with intent to prohibit the apprehension or obstruct the prosecution or defense of any person, the person knowingly commits any of the following actions: (a) Destroys, alters, conceals or disguises physical evidence, plants false evidence, or furnishes false information;

Id.

The state, in our view, failed to establish an essential element of this offense, namely, that the juvenile “knowingly ... furnish[ed] false information” by giving, as charged, a false birthdate to the arresting officer. The undisputed evidence shows that the juvenile, in fact, gave his correct birthdate to Officer Masterrer who, in turn, placed this date in the arrest report. Prior thereto, the juvenile did give technically “false” birthdates to the officer, but those dates were, in fact, retracted before the officer made out his arrest report. Just as in perjury prosecutions where a defendant may recant his intentionally false testimony prior to the final submission of the case, Jones v. State, 400 So. 2d 12 (Fla.1981); Carter v. State, 384 So. 2d 1255 (Fla.1980); Brannen v. State, 94 Fla. 656, 114 So. 429 (1927); State v. Snipes, 433 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983), so, too, one accused of obstructing justice, as here, should be able to retract any “false information” before it is officially recorded or does any harm. The underlying policy in both such cases is first, to encourage witnesses to tell the truth to the authorities and, second, the correlative need to induce such witnesses to correct, without fear of prosecution, their prior falsehoods before they have done any harm.

The final adjudication of delinquency under review is reversed and the case remanded to the trial court with directions to discharge the juvenile from the cause.

Reversed and remanded.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By (11 total)

  • Steele v. State, 537 So. 2d 711 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
    …in silent,3 and he did so until admitting his true name. No evidence was adduced by the state as to the method by which the police learned Steele’s name or the effort or time expended in obtaining that information. In this case, as in P.P. v. State, 466 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), the false information was corrected by the defendant, albeit with prompting, before it was officially recorded or did any harm. The state argues that Steele’s failure to initially give McDonald his correct name interfered with t…
  • C.T. v. State, 481 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
    …nitial stop, the appellant admitted his falsehood and gave the officer his true legal name. The officer then arrested appellant for opposing a law enforcement officer without violence, in violation of § 843.02, Fla.Stat. Here, as in P.P. v. State, 466 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), the juvenile voluntarily corrected the false information he gave the officer before any real harm was done. Although the false information given by the juvenile defendant in this case was “officially recorded” in the sense that i…
  • State v. Townsend, 585 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)
    …rmative and reverse. We agree with In Interest of J.H., 559 So. 2d 702 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) that the policy reason for excusing false testimony in order to induce witnesses to change their statement and tell the truth as enunciated in P.P. v. State, 466 So. 2d 1140 (Fla.3d DCA 1985) is no longer applicable after an arrest has occurred. Townsend, by his constant lying, made the investigation of a simple misdemeanor driving without a license charge far more time consuming than it normally would be. His post-arr…

Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw