VERONICA GREEN POSEY
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 1st DCA | 2020-01-22
No. 19-1283
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2020)

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

The appellate court affirmed a conviction for first-degree felony murder. The court found sufficient evidence that the defendant committed aggravated child abuse, which served as the predicate felony for the murder charge, and that the defendant properly preserved this issue for appeal.


Holding

Yes, the evidence was sufficient to prove aggravated child abuse, and the issue was preserved for appeal. The defendant's intentional act of sitting on the child to restrain her, even after the child stated she could not breathe, demonstrated the requisite intent for aggravated child abuse.


Headnotes

[1] A defendant's failure to raise a specific legal argument regarding the sufficiency of evidence of a particular element in a motion for judgment of acquittal does not pres…

[2] Felony murder can be predicated upon a single act of aggravated child abuse where aggravated child abuse is enumerated in the felony-murder statute.

Previewing 2 of 2 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

“Appellant asserts that the State’s evidence of the requisite willful intent to abuse the victim child was insufficient to prove aggravated child abuse so as to survive the motions for judgment of acquittal on the felony murder charge.”

This quote outlines the appellant's primary argument on appeal regarding the sufficiency of evidence for aggravated child abuse.

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

The defendant, a 64-year-old, 320-pound woman, was convicted of felony murder after she sat on a nine-year-old child to restrain her, causing the chil…

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
Jay

BILBREY, J.

Appellant challenges her conviction and life sentence for first degree felony murder after the trial court denied the defense motions for judgment of acquittal after the State’s case in chief and at the conclusion of trial. Appellant asserts that the State’s evidence of the requisite willful intent to abuse the victim child was insufficient to prove aggravated child abuse so as to survive the motions for judgment of acquittal on the felony murder charge. We disagree and affirm.

The State’s uncontroverted evidence was that the child victim was a nine-year-old girl who was four feet and eight inches tall and weighed 109 pounds. The medical examiner testified at trial that the cause of death was “mechanical asphyxiation,” or compression of the chest and torso which prevented the child from breathing. The medical examiner further testified that such compression was consistent with the child being sat upon for several minutes — the admitted, intentional actions of the 64-year-old, 320-pound Appellant.

The State also presented evidence, through the testimony of the medical examiner, of non-life-threatening injuries on the child’s body. The medical examiner described bruising and scrapes she observed, including “the worst case that I’ve seen of the severity of the bruising on the buttocks.” According to the medical examiner, the bruises were “significant” and extended “very deep” into the tissue, indicating “possibly injury on top of injury.”

The State concluded its case in chief by presenting a video recording of Appellant’s post Miranda interview with an Escambia County Sheriff’s Office investigator. In the interview, Appellant explained to an investigator that she went to the child’s home the day of the incident after the child’s adoptive mother requested Appellant’s assistance in controlling the child’s wild behavior. Appellant described how she and the mother struck the child, the mother using a belt and Appellant using a ruler reinforced with a curtain rod or similar light pipe, until the ruler broke. When the child broke away from the women, Appellant caught her and sat on her to restrain her movements. This final restraint resulted in the child’s death.

The Appellant moved for a JOA at the conclusion of the State’s case in chief and at the close of all evidence. Appellant’s motions for JOA were not based on any deficiency in the State’s evidence of Appellant’s intent to commit aggravated child abuse. Rather, Appellant’s counsel argued that Appellant’s striking the child prior to the act which caused the child’s death constituted legally permissible corporal punishment. Accordingly, the motions for JOA did not preserve the sufficiency of the State’s evidence of the element of intent for appellate review. See Newsome v. State, 199 So. 3d 510, 513 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (holding that to preserve a motion for judgment of acquittal, “the precise legal argument as to why the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction must be presented to the trial court”).

Even if the sufficiency of the State’s evidence of Appellant’s intent had been raised in the motions for JOA, we would still affirm. Appellant readily admitted, in her pre-trial interview with the investigator which was offered by the State and during her own testimony at trial, that she intended to sit on the child and use her considerable body weight to restrain the child. She further admitted that she remained upon the child’s body even after the second time the child told Appellant she could not breathe. These actions were sufficient to show a prima facie case that Appellant willfully tortured or maliciously punished the child and thereby committed aggravated child abuse. See § 827.03(1)(a)2., Fla. Stat. (2017).

The State’s proof that the child was killed while Appellant was engaged in aggravated child abuse was therefore sufficient to survive the motions for JOA. See §§ 782.04(1)(a)2.h. & 827.03(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2017). Because aggravated child abuse is clearly enumerated in the felony-murder statute, felony-murder can be predicated upon a single act of aggravated child abuse. State v. Sturdivant, 94 So. 3d 434, 440 (Fla. 2012). Under these circumstances, the State’s evidence of Appellant’s intent was sufficient to survive the motions for JOA even if the issue had been preserved.

We find no merit in Appellant’s second issue, concerning an evidentiary objection, and affirm without further comment. The judgment and sentence are AFFIRMED.

MAKAR and JAY, JJ., concur. _____________________________


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw