WILLIE WHITE, 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 trial court did not err in denying the motion for judgment of acquittal, as the evidence supported submitting the question of whether the knife was a deadly weapon to the jury.
Appellant was convicted of aggravated battery with a deadly weapon after a physical altercation where he used a knife. The incident involved striking …
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 Aggravated Battery With A Deadly Weapon cases and more on FLexlaw
ORFINGER, M., Senior Judge.
In a physical confrontation with one Michael Irvin, appellant pulled a knife with a five inch blade and in the ensuing struggle hit Irvin in the head with the butt of the knife and cut Irvin’s fingers. Charged and convicted of aggravated battery with a deadly weapon, appellant argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal, and that at most he is guilty of simple battery.
The incident took place in the parking lot of a grocery store. There was testimony that it started when appellant approached the truck in which Irvin was sitting, struck the top of the truck with his hand, then struck Irvin on the head. When Irvin exited the truck, appellant pulled the knife and they struggled over it. It was during that struggle that appellant hit Irvin in the head with the butt of the knife and Irvin’s fingers were cut. The store owner heard the commotion, came out and broke up the fight.
Whether or not an object is a deadly weapon is a question of fact to be determined by the jury from the evidence, taking into consideration its size, shape and material and the manner in which it was used or was capable of being used. Duba v. State, 446 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). In moving for a judgment of acquittal, a defendant admits not only the facts stated and the evidence adduced by the state, but he also admits, for the purposes of the motion, every conclusion favorable to the state that a fact finder might reasonably infer from the evidence. The court should not grant the motion unless the evidence is such that no view which the jury may lawfully take of it favorable to the state can be sustained under the law. Herman v. State, 472 So. 2d 770 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), rev. denied, 482 So. 2d 348 (Fla.1986).
On the evidence adduced, the trial court properly denied the motion for acquittal and correctly submitted the matter to the jury.
AFFIRMED.
GRIFFIN, C.J. and GOSHORN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Michaud v. State, 47 So. 3d 374 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)…472 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985) (razor blade held to victim’s throat during attempted robbery could be found to be deadly weapon). Whether an object is a deadly weapon is generally a question of fact to be determined by the jury. White v. State, 723 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). Here, the trial court properly submitted the matter to the jury. We do, however, agree with Mi-chaud’s contention that his conviction for aggravated assault with a firearm must be set aside. At trial, Michaud requested that the…
-
Mashburn v. State, 745 So. 2d 453 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)…is a “firearm or other deadly weapon” or simply a “weapon” determines the level of the offense for scoring purposes.2 “Whether or not an object is a deadly weapon is a question of fact to be determined by the jury from the evidence.” White v. State, 723 So. 2d 357, 357 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); see also Duba v. State, 446 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). Although defense counsel objected at the sentencing hearing to Mashburn being sentenced for robbery with a firearm, at trial the defense acquiesced in the use of…
-
Lawrence v. State, 751 So. 2d 781 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See White v. State, 723 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); Kent v. State, 702 So. 2d 265 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), rev. denied, 717 So. 2d 533 (Fla.1998). W. SHARP, PETERSON and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Duba v. State, 446 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)
- Herman v. State, 472 So. 2d 770 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)