THOMAS OVERTON, 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.
The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove intent for possession of burglary tools, but affirmed the conviction for attempted possession of an oral communication interception device.
The defendant was convicted of possession of burglary tools and attempted possession of an oral communication interception device. The evidence for th…
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 Self-Representation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We reverse the defendant’s conviction for possession of burglary tools because the evidence failed to establish any overt act necessary to prove the intent to commit a trespass or a burglary in employing the tools. Thomas v. State, 531 So. 2d 708 (Fla.1988).
We affirm his conviction for attempted possession of an oral communication interception device, § 934.04, Fla.Stat. (1991). An expert testified that the device found in defendant’s possession was very small and could be readily hidden and the particular device was set for a frequency of a radio station whose signals might intercept. The same expert further testified that the setting of this frequency allowed the defendant to employ the device to intercept conversations without detection. Consequently, there was ample evidence from which a jury could reach the ultimate finding and conclude defendant’s guilt.
Likewise, we reject his claim that he did not make a knowing and intelligent waiver of his right to counsel and that he did not understand and appreciate the advantages and disadvantages of self-representation. Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975).
For the foregoing reasons, the defendant’s conviction and sentence for possession of burglary tools is reversed. In all other respects, his conviction and sentence are affirmed.
Reversed in part and affirmed in part and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (U.S. 1975)
- Thomas v. State, 531 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 1988)