ARCHIE ATKINS, 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 affirmed the probation revocation but reversed the conviction for attempted aggravated battery on a law enforcement officer because that crime does not exist under Florida law, remanding for resentencing on attempted battery without statutory enhancement.
A conviction for attempted aggravated battery on a law enforcement officer must be reversed because the crime does not exist under Florida law, even when the defendant requested the jury instruction.
[1] Conviction of a nonexistent crime constitutes fundamental error requiring reversal even when the defendant requested a jury instruction on the nonexistent offense.
Previewing 1 of 1 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 crime of which he was convicted does not exist”
The court explaining why the conviction for attempted aggravated battery on a law enforcement officer must be reversed.
Archie Atkins was convicted of attempted aggravated battery on a law enforcement officer and his probation was revoked based on this conviction and ot…
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 Attempted Battery cases and more on FLexlaw
GRIFFIN, C.J.
Appellant, Archie Atkins, complains on appeal of the revocation of his probation based on his conviction of new substantive offenses. He also complains of his conviction of one of those substantive offenses — attempted aggravated battery on a law enforcement officer. As to the first issue, we find no error. The latter is, on the other hand, reviewable error as the crime of which he was convicted does not exist. Merritt v. State, 712 So. 2d 384 (Fla. 1998). Furthermore, although defendant never objected to his conviction for this offense and even requested a jury instruction on this nonexistent offense, the issue can be raised for the first time on appeal. Fredericks v. State, 675 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (conviction of a nonexistent crime is fundamental error mandating reversal even when error was invited by defendant, as by request for a jury instruction on a nonexistent offense), citing Achin v. State, 436 So. 2d 30 (Fla.1982). The proper remedy is to remand for resentencing on the offense of attempted battery, without use of the statutory enhancement factor. See Merritt, supra; Mills v. State, 714 So. 2d 1198 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED.
THOMPSON and ANTOON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Achin v. State, 436 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 1982)
- Merritt v. State, 712 So. 2d 384 (Fla. 1998)
- Fredericks v. State, 675 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
- Precious Mills v. State, 714 So. 2d 1198 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)