T.H., 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.
The court held that socks, as items of personal apparel, do not constitute burglary tools under the statute, even if intended to wipe fingerprints.
T.H. was arrested after fleeing a stolen vehicle, and socks were found underneath him. The state argued he intended to use the socks to wipe fingerpri…
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 Trespass In A Conveyance cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
T.H. appeals an adjudication of delinquency for the offenses of trespass in a conveyance and possession of burglary tools. We affirm the adjudication based on the finding of trespass in a conveyance but reverse the finding that T.H. possessed burglary tools.
T.H. was arrested after fleeing from the passenger’s seat of a stolen vehicle. The arresting officer discovered a pair of socks underneath T.H. during the arrest. T.H. was not wearing the socks at the time of his arrest, and the state introduced evidence that he intended to use the socks to wipe fingerprints from the interior of the vehicle. The trial court found that these socks were burglary tools and adjudicated the defendant delinquent.
The supreme court has held that socks are “items of personal apparel” that do not fall within the definition of burglary tools in section 810.06, Florida Statutes (1993). Green v. State, 604 So. 2d 471 (Fla.1992); see also Mitchell v. State, 657 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). The state argues that Green controls only when the apparel is worn for its intended use. We do not find language in that case which limits the holding to those instances. Rather, Green holds that section 810.06 does not contain a definition of burglary tools sufficient to encompass items of personal apparel even if they are actually used to prevent fingerprint evidence.
Affirmed as modified.
DANAHY, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND and WHATLEY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (15 total)
-
Jennings v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n & Healthsouth of Fort Lauderdale, 689 So. 2d 1193 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)…Fink v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 665 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). The commission’s order is presumptively correct and should not be reversed where supported, as here, by substantial competent evidence. Kelle v. D.H. Holmes Co., Ltd., 658 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Scott v. Cent. Florida Tower Corp., 646 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). We recognize that generally a single, isolated act of negligence does not constitute sufficient misconduct to justify depriving an employee of benefits. See…
-
Gyuri Garcia v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 872 So. 2d 966 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)…ellate review, the Commission’s order, which adopted the decision of the appeals referee, is entitled to a presumption of legal correctness. See Sekinger v. Heritage Insurance, Inc., 718 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998); Kelle v. D.H. Holmes Co., Ltd., 658 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). To successfully challenge any finding of the appeals referee, the appellant must show that it is not supported by competent, substantial evidence in the record. See Ford v. Southeast Atlantic Corp., 588 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 1st DCA…
-
Remor v. State, 991 So. 2d 957 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)…items of clothing which cannot be classified as burglary tools, since they are not “objects which actually facilitate the breaking and entering of a dwelling,” structure, or vehicle. See Green v. State, 604 So. 2d 471, 473 (Fla.1992); T.H. v. State, 658 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (holding that socks are items of personal apparel and not burglary tools). On the charge of resisting arrest without violence, the police had a reasonable suspicion to stop and detain Remor because he was in violation of a hurric…
Previewing 3 of 15 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Green v. State, 604 So. 2d 471 (Fla. 1992)
- Torres v. Marzelli, 657 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
- Riley Mitchell v. State, 657 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)