LEE R. TROYER, 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.
Lee Troyer was convicted of violating Florida Statute section 319.33 based on an information with a facially defective charging document. The court reversed the conviction because the offense described in the body of the information did not match the crime defined by the statute cited, resulting in a conviction for a crime that never occurred.
The conviction must be reversed and vacated. When a discrepancy exists between the offense designated in the information heading and the crime depicted in the body, the offense described in the body is the one with which the defendant is charged. However, Troyer's conduct was neither condemned by section 319.33 nor described in the main portion of the information, constituting a fundamental error resulting in a conviction for a crime that never occurred.
[1] A criminal information must contain a plain, concise, and definite written statement of the essential facts constituting the offense charged.
[2] When a discrepancy exists between the offense designated in the heading of an information and the crime described in the body, the offense described in the body is the on…
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“An "indictment or information upon which the defendant is to be tried shall be a plain, concise and definite written statement of the essential facts constituting the offense charged."”
Establishes the constitutional and procedural requirement for charging documents to clearly state the offense.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTroyer was arrested on June 14, 1990, for attempting to procure a vehicle license tag by false means. The amended information was captioned 'Obtaining…
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.
[*531] FRANK, Judge.
Lee Troyer was arrested on June 14, 1990, for attempting to procure a vehicle license tag by false means. The amended information, detailing the offense, was appropriately captioned “Obtaining A License Tag By Fraud.” The body of the information, however, charged a violation of section 319.33, Florida Statutes, a statute pertaining to certificates of title, and alleges that Troyer “did make application for title and/or registration and in the course of said application [knowingly] used a false or fictitious name ... and/or make [sic] any false statement....” We need not reach Troyer’s contention that the proof adduced by the state fell short of demonstrating a specific intent to falsify the application; the state concedes that the conviction arising from the facially defective charging document warrants reversal.
An “indictment or information upon which the defendant is to be tried shall be a plain, concise and definite written statement of the essential facts constituting the offense charged.” Fla. R.Crim.P. 3.140(b). When, as here, an apparent discrepancy exists between the offense designated in the information heading and the crime depicted in the body of the instrument, the offense described in the body is the one with which the defendant is charged. Keesee v. State, 204 So. 2d 925 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967); see also, Janes v. State, 585 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Troyer’s conduct, although perhaps prohibited by some other statute, is neither condemned by section 319.33, nor described in the main portion of the information. Although Troyer did not raise the error either at trial or on appeal, we find a conviction for a crime that never occurred fundamentally erroneous.
Accordingly, we reverse Troyer’s conviction and vacate the sentence.
DANAHY, A.C.J., and HALL, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Burnette, 881 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)…the court erred in permitting the state to argue that defendant had committed a burglary of a dwelling when defendant was charged only with burglary of a structure. The trial court granted the amended motion for a new trial, citing Troyer v. State, 610 So. 2d 530 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). The standard of review in this case is de novo because the trial court granted a new trial based on a matter of law, not for lack of sufficiency of the evidence. See Geibel v. State, 817 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (holding t…1 / 2
-
Castillo v. State, 929 So. 2d 1180 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)…structure. When a “discrepancy exists between the offense designated in the information heading and the crime depicted in the body of the instrument, the offense described in the body is the one with which the defendant is charged.” Troyer v. State, 610 So. 2d 530, 531 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Although the charging instrument was titled “Burglary (Dwelling),” the information included the essential elements of burglary of a structure and a reference to that statute. This case is thus distinguishable from the cases…
-
Figueroa v. State, 84 So. 3d 1158 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)…llegal.1 Figueroa correctly contends that when there is a discrepancy between the heading and the body of an information as to the offense charged, “the offense described in the body is the one with which the defendant is charged.” Troyer v. State, 610 So. 2d 530, 531 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992) (citing Keesee v. State, 204 So. 2d 925, 926-27 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967)). He then argues that the information failed to charge robbery with a firearm and was fundamentally defective. Citing Mesa v. State, 632 So. 2d 1094, 1097 (F…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Keesee v. State, 204 So. 2d 925 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967)
- McATEE v. McATEE, 585 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Janes v. State, 585 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)