A.K., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1999-01-15
No. 97-02681
THREADGILL, A.C.J., and GREEN, J., Concur.
724 So. 2d 660 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1999) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

A.K. was adjudicated delinquent for trespass with gang-related enhancement, but the appellate court reversed because the State failed to prove that the Asian Crypts was a criminal street gang as defined by statute, which is a necessary prerequisite for the enhancement. The court remanded for readjudication without the enhancement.


Holding

The State failed to prove that the Asian Crypts was a criminal street gang because it did not establish that the gang had two or more members who met the statutory membership criteria and engaged in a pattern of criminal street gang activity. Therefore, the State also failed to prove A.K. was a member of a criminal street gang, and the enhancement was improper.


Headnotes

[1] To qualify as a criminal street gang, the group must have as a primary activity the commission of criminal acts, consist of three or more persons with a common identifier…

[2] Proof that an individual meets membership criteria for a criminal street gang is insufficient if the State fails to prove the alleged gang itself qualifies as a criminal…

Previewing 2 of 5 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

Key Quotes

“The State proved that A.K. met two or more of the latter criteria. But it failed to prove that the alleged gang to which he belonged, the Asian Crypts, was a criminal street gang as defined in the statute.”

Establishes the core holding that the State's proof was deficient as to gang status, not individual membership

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

A.K. pleaded guilty to two counts of trespass. The trial court enhanced the degree of his crimes based on alleged membership in the Asian Crypts stree…

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.


Opinion of the Court
NORTHCUTT, Judge.

NORTHCUTT, Judge.

A.K. was adjudicated delinquent after pleading guilty to two counts of trespass. He challenges the court’s decision to enhance the degree of his crimes based on his membership in a street gang. See § 874.04, Fla. Stat. (Supp.1996). We hold that the State failed to prove that A.K. was a member of a criminal street gang under section 874.03, Florida Statutes (Supp.1996), a necessary prerequisite to application of the enhancement provisions of section 874.04. On remand we direct the court to readjudicate A.K. without enhancing the degree of his crimes. The court may revisit its decision to impose community control, and determine if some other penalty is appropriate.

Section 874.03(2) states that a member of a criminal street gang is a person who belongs to a criminal street gang, as defined in section 874.03(1), and who meets two or more of eight other criteria set forth in the subsection. The State proved that A.K. met two or more of the latter criteria. But it failed to prove that the alleged gang to which he belonged, the Asian Crypts, was a criminal street gang as defined in the statute.

To qualify as a criminal street gang under section 874.03(1), a gang must (1) have as one of its primary activities the commission of criminal or delinquent acts; (2) consist of three or more persons who have a common name or common identifying signs, colors, or symbols; and (3) “have two or more members who, individually or collectively, engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal street gang activity.” (Emphasis supplied.)

Thus, to satisfy the third element the gang must include two or more persons who meet the membership criteria set forth in section 874.03(2), i.e., persons who belong to the gang and have engaged in at least two of the other eight activities listed in that subsection, and who have engaged in a pattern of criminal street gang activity.

Detective Sotolongo presented the only evidence about the other alleged members of the gang. A photograph admitted in evidence showed A.K. and several other people. Sotolongo testified that one of the others in the picture had been arrested for a drive-by shooting, but did not name him. In another photograph, A.K. was again pictured with several other people, all of whom were flashing gang signs. Detective Sotolongo identi- fled two of the others, and stated that one had been arrested on battery charges and the other had been arrested for unspecified criminal acts.

This testimony did not establish that the three men mentioned were “members” of a criminal street gang. No evidence was introduced to show that they met two of the criteria enumerated in section 874.03(2). Arguably, two of the alleged members met one of the criteria because the photograph showed them flashing gang hand signs. See § 874.03(2)(d), Fla. Stat. (1995). But meeting one of the criteria is not enough. Because the State failed to prove that the Asian Crypts had two or more members who engaged in a pattern of criminal street gang activity, the group did not qualify as a criminal street gang under section 874.03(1).1 In turn, because the State did not prove that the Asian Crypts was a criminal street gang under the statute, it did not prove that A.K. was a member of a criminal street gang under section 874.03(2).

Reversed and remanded.

THREADGILL, A.C.J., and GREEN, J., Concur. . We leave for another day the question of whether evidence of mere arrests is sufficient to establish a "pattern of criminal street gang activity”, which is defined in section 874.03(3) as "the commission or attempted commission of, or solicitation or conspiracy to commit, two or more felony or three or more misdemeanor offenses, or one felony and two misdemeanor offenses, or the comparable number of delinquent acts or violations of law which would be felonies or misdemeanors if committed by an adult, on separate occasions within a 3-year period.”


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • E.A.R. v. State, 4 So. 3d 614 (Fla. 2009)
    …ddress “criminal street gang associates"). See also, e.g., L.B. v. State, 965 So. 2d 1214, 1216-17 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007); R.C. v. State, 948 So. 2d 48, 49-51 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007); A.H. v. State, 724 So. 2d 1268, 1269 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); A.K. v. State, 724 So. 2d 660, 660-61 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); S.L. v. State, 708 So. 2d 1006, 1007-08 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). . M.S., 927 So. 2d at 1046 (quoting A.J.V. v. State, 842 So. 2d 1027, 1029 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)). . §§ 985.01-.02, Fla. Stat. (2007). . § 985.03(l)-(57), Fla. S…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw