GREGORY HALL, 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.
Gregory Hall appeals his conviction for felony petit theft under Florida Statute § 812.014(2)(c). The court affirms, holding that a prior felony grand theft conviction qualifies as a prior petit theft conviction for purposes of enhancing a subsequent petit theft offense to a felony.
The court affirmed Hall's conviction for felony petit theft, holding that a prior felony grand theft conviction does count toward the enhancement requirement, so that a conviction for petit theft following a prior felony and prior misdemeanor petit theft constitutes a qualifying 'third conviction' under the statute.
[1] A prior felony conviction may be counted as equivalent to a prior misdemeanor conviction for the purpose of determining the number of prior offenses required for a felony…
[2] The purpose of statutes enhancing penalties for repeat offenders is to punish recidivism, and the legislature is presumed not to intend to punish a defendant with prior f…
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“Upon a third or subsequent conviction for petit theft, the offender shall be guilty of a felony of the third degree”
Establishes the statutory requirement at issue—that a third petit theft conviction results in felony enhancement
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHall was charged with petit theft after stealing money from a store. He had previously been convicted of misdemeanor petit theft and grand theft. The …
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 Felony Petit Theft cases and more on FLexlaw
LEHAN, Judge.
We affirm defendant’s conviction for felony petit theft, a violation of section 812.-014(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1983).
The offense for which defendant was charged involved his stealing a sum of money from a store. He was charged with felony petit theft on the basis that he had previously been convicted of misdemeanor petit theft and also of grand theft and that his conviction for his current offense constituted his third conviction within the meaning of the foregoing statute.
Section 812.014(2)(e) provides that, “Upon a third or subsequent conviction for petit theft, the offender shall be guilty of a felony of the third degree....” Defendant argues that he did not have two prior petit theft convictions as required by that statute in order to justify a conviction for a felony. We disagree with defendant and affirm.
While our attention has been directed to no case law directly in point, nor have we found any, we believe rationales in State v. Harris, 356 So. 2d 315 (Fla.1978), and Ezell v. State, 384 So. 2d 1309 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980), support the conviction of defendant for felony petit theft. In Harris the Florida Supreme Court analogized section 812.-021(3), Florida Statutes (1977), the predecessor of section 812.014, Florida Statutes (1983), with section 775.084, the habitual felony offender statute, saying that the two statutes “are essentially identical, with similar purposes, and should afford to a defendant the same procedural safeguards.” 356 So. 2d at 316. In Ezell this court, in construing the habitual felony offender statute, found that for purposes of determining the number of prior offenses of defendant, a prior felony should be treated as at least the equivalent of a prior misdemeanor. “Surely the legislature did not intend to punish a defendant who has committed two misdemeanors more severely than one who has committed a felony and a misdemeanor.” 384 So. 2d at 1310. Similarly, in the case at hand we conclude that in section 812.014(2)(c) the legislature did not intend to punish defendant who had committed a prior felony and a prior misdemeanor less severely than one who had committed two prior misdemeanors.
Affirmed.
RYDER, C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Jackson, 526 So. 2d 58 (Fla. 1988)…SHAW, Justice. We have for review Jackson v. State, 515 So. 2d 394 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), in which the district court certified conflict with Hall v. State, 469 So. 2d 224 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We approve the decision of the district court below. Jackson, who had two prior grand theft convictions, was charged with a petit theft offense for shoplifting a pair of sungl…
-
Jackson v. State, 515 So. 2d 394 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…ubsequent conviction for petit theft, an offender shall be guilty of a felony of the third degree. The state contends it was permissible to reclassify appellant’s misdemeanor petit theft to felony petit theft based on the rationale of Hall v. State, 469 So. 2d 224 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1985). In Hall, the defendant was charged with felony petit theft on the basis of a prior petit theft and a prior grand theft. He argued that the statute’s requirement of two prior petit thefts could not be satisfied by one grand and o…1 / 2
-
Coffie v. State, 562 So. 2d 423 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)…t in all of them. First, the appellant contends that the trial court erred by reclassifying his petit theft conviction to a felony. At the time the appellant was sentenced, the court was bound by and followed this court’s decision in Hall v. State, 469 So. 2d 224 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). In Hall, we held that two prior grand theft convictions constituted a proper predicate for the reclassification of the charge. However, after the appellant was sentenced the supreme court disapproved our Hall decision. In State v…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Harris, 356 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 1978)
- Ezell v. State, 384 So. 2d 1309 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)