J.B., A CHILD, 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.
In a juvenile delinquency proceeding, J.B. challenged whether the corpus delicti of the offense was established independent of his admission. The First District Court of Appeal held that the corpus delicti issue was not preserved for appeal because the appellant failed to raise it at trial, and clarified that such preservation is required despite prior precedent suggesting otherwise.
The corpus delicti issue was not preserved for appeal and therefore the affirmed. The court clarified that corpus delicti challenges must be raised at trial to be reviewed on appeal, rejecting prior interpretations suggesting the issue constitutes fundamental error requiring no preservation.
[1] The corpus delicti rule, requiring independent establishment of the corpus delicti apart from a defendant's admissions, must be preserved for appeal by raising the issue…
[2] A failure to object to the admission of a defendant's statements into evidence and a failure to raise the corpus delicti argument in a motion for judgment of acquittal pr…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“The corpus delicti of an offense must ordinarily be established independent of the defendant's admissions”
States the foundational rule that corpus delicti cannot rest solely on a defendant's own statements
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant's statements were received into evidence in a juvenile delinquency proceeding without objection. When the appellant later moved for a ju…
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 Corpus Delicti Rule cases and more on FLexlaw
ALLEN, Judge.
The appellant challenges orders entered in a juvenile delinquency proceeding, arguing that the corpus delicti of the offense was not established independent of his admission as to one of the elements. We conclude that this issue was not preserved for appeal, and because we thus clarify a prior decision of this court the case is being considered by the criminal division en banc, pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.331(b).
The corpus delicti of. an offense must ordinarily be established independent of the defendant’s admissions, e.g., Burks v. State, 613 So. 2d 441 (Fla.1993), but in the present case the appellant’s statements were received into evidence without objection. When the appellant later moved for a judgment of acquittal he did not make a corpus delicti argument, and he did not otherwise raise the issue below. In Tompkins v. State, 502 So. 2d 415 (Fla.1986), the supreme court suggested that it may be necessary to preserve the issue for appeal by first raising the matter in the trial court.
Although we described the corpus de-licti rule in Farley v. City of Tallahassee, 243 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971), as a “fundamental” principle of law which produces “fundamental error,” the recited facts in Farley do not clearly indicate whether the corpus delicti issue was raised at trial. To the extent that Farley may be read as suggesting that such preservation is not required, we would now abandon this interpretation. We likewise disagree with the second district decision in Johnson v. State, 569 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), rev. denied, 581 So. 2d 167 (Fla.1991), which cited Farley and treated the issue as producing a “fundamentally erroneous” conviction, so as to permit reversal regardless of whether the issue was preserved at trial. The present case does not involve a situation such as Nelson v. State, 543 So. 2d 1308 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989), where the evidence negated the occurrence of a crime. Rather, in the present ease there was evidence as to each element of the offense, and the question of whether an independent corpus delicti was shown has not been preserved for review.
The appealed orders are affirmed.
MINER, WEBSTER, MICKLE, LAWRENCE and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
J.B. v. State, 705 So. 2d 1376 (Fla. 1998)…OVERTON, Justice. We have for review J.B. v. State, 689 So. 2d 360 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), which expressly and directly conflicts with Johnson v. State, 569 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), on the issue of whether the absence of independent proof of the corpus delicti is an issue that can be raised for the first time on…
-
State v. Anton, 700 So. 2d 743 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…that failure to prove the corpus delicti apart from the defendant’s confession is fundamental error that need not be preserved. See Johnson v. State, 569 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), review denied, 581 So. 2d 167 (Fla.1990); but see J.B. v. State, 689 So. 2d 360 (Fla. 1st DCA), review granted, No. 90,309, 697 So. 2d 511 (Fla. June 20, 1997). As a result, we must determine whether the State presented sufficient evidence of the corpus delicti to warrant admission of Anton’s statement to Deputy Moe. The supre…
-
Wyon Dale Childers v. State, 936 So. 2d 619 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…c jurisdiction to consider whether defendant who has been sentenced as habitual felony offender for two or more offenses arising out of single criminal episode may have sentences further enhanced by order that they run consecutively); J.B. v. State, 689 So. 2d 360, 360 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (“To the extent that Farley [v. City of Tallahassee, 243 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971),] may be read as suggesting that such preservation is not required, we would now [*637] abandon this interpretation.”), approved, by 705…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Tompkins v. State, 502 So. 2d 415 (Fla. 1986)
- Burks v. State, 613 So. 2d 441 (Fla. 1993)
- Nelson v. State, 543 So. 2d 1308 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)
- Johnson v. State, 569 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
- Farley v. City OF Tallahassee, 243 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)