NILO ROCHE, 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.
Nilo Roche appeals his felony petit theft conviction, arguing that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction because the charging document did not reference his prior convictions. The Florida appellate court affirms, holding that circuit court jurisdiction over felony petit theft is properly invoked when the document merely charges a third-degree felony, without need to allege prior convictions in the charging instrument.
Circuit court jurisdiction over felony petit theft is properly invoked when the charging document clearly indicates that felony petit theft is being charged, even without specific allegations of prior convictions in the charging instrument.
[1] A charging document need only clearly state that felony petit theft is being charged to invoke the jurisdiction of the circuit court; prior convictions need not be specif…
[2] Felony petit theft is a substantive offense requiring proof of prior convictions, but these prior convictions should not be presented to the jury due to potential prejudi…
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“In order to invoke the jurisdiction of the circuit court, the charging document must only make clear that felony petit theft is being charged. The prior convictions need not be specifically alleged in the charging document.”
Establishes the court's holding that prior convictions do not need to be alleged in the charging instrument to invoke circuit court jurisdiction over felony petit theft.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was initially charged in county court with misdemeanor retail theft. The State filed an amended information in circuit court charging felony…
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
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Nilo Roche, appeals his conviction for felony petit theft pursuant to Section 812.014(2)(d), Florida Statutes (1989). We affirm.
Appellant was originally charged in the county court with misdemeanor retail theft. Subsequently, the appellee, State, filed an amended information invoking the jurisdiction of the circuit court. The amended information alleged that appellant had “two or more prior convictions” of petit theft, thus enhancing the charge to felony petit theft.
The amended information was amended a second time to comply with the requirements of State v. Crocker, 519 So. 2d 32 (Fla.2d DCA 1987) and State v. Harris, 356 So. 2d 315 (Fla.1978). Crocker and Harris established that although felony petit theft is a substantive offense requiring the State to prove prior convictions, the prior convictions should not be brought to the jury’s attention because of possible prejudice. Accordingly, the State removed all references to the prior convictions from the information, retaining only that language charging appellant with a third degree felony.
Appellant contends that because there was no reference made in the information to the prior convictions, the jurisdiction of the circuit court was never properly invoked. We disagree.
Because of the danger of possible prejudice against a defendant who has been previously convicted of the same substantive offenses as that charged in the present information, the Florida Supreme Court delineated a procedural bifurcation in State v. Harris, 356 So. 2d at 315. A defendant charged with felony petit larceny is first to be tried in the circuit court, without bringing the prior convictions to the attention of the jury. Harris, 356 So. 2d at 317. Upon conviction of the third petit larceny, the court will determine the existence of prior convictions in a separate proceeding. Harris, 356 So. 2d at 317.
In order to invoke the jurisdiction of the circuit court, the charging document must only make clear that felony petit theft is being charged. The prior convictions need not be specifically alleged in the charging document. Crocker, 519 So. 2d at 33.
We find compliance with the requirements of Harris and Crocker. Accordingly, we affirm.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hlad v. State, 565 So. 2d 762 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)…convictions were only punishment enhancing factors. In this case the prior convictions were alleged in the information to allege a felony DUI and vest jurisdiction in the circuit court. See State v. Harris, 356 So. 2d 315 (Fla.1978); Roche v. State, 560 So. 2d 1345 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). . See In re Winship, 397 U.S. at 358, 90 S.Ct. at 1068-69, cited in 9 Wigmore, Evidence § 2497a, page 416 note 1 (Chadbourn rev. 1981). . See 9 Wigmore, Evidence § 2486, page 288, note 1 (Chadbourn rev. 1981). . See Annotation…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Harris, 356 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 1978)
- State v. Crocker, 519 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)