STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
JONATHAN HARPER, 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 State appeals the trial court's dismissal of a tampering with evidence charge against Jonathan Harper. The appellate court reverses because the trial court relied on case law that was subsequently disapproved by the Florida Supreme Court in State v. Jennings, which established that throwing evidence away in the presence of a law enforcement officer can constitute tampering.
The court held that an affirmative act of throwing evidence away can constitute tampering depending on the circumstances, and that the trial court's dismissal was improper because it relied on cases disapproved by the Florida Supreme Court in State v. Jennings.
[1] A trial court's dismissal of a tampering charge is reversible error when based on case law subsequently disapproved by the Florida Supreme Court.
[2] Tossing evidence away in the presence of a law enforcement officer can constitute tampering or concealing evidence, depending on the circumstances.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“We disagree with Boice to the extent it can be read to mean that tossing evidence away in the presence of a law enforcement officer does not, as a matter of law, constitute a violation of the statute. Depending upon the circumstances, such an act could amount to tampering or concealing evidence. An affirmative act of throwing evidence away constitutes more than mere abandonment.”
The Florida Supreme Court's holding in Jennings that disapproved the trial court's reliance on Boice and established that throwing evidence away can constitute tampering depending on circumstances
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJonathan Harper was arrested for tampering with evidence after he allegedly instructed a passenger in his vehicle to throw marijuana and a marijuana p…
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 Affirmative Act cases and more on FLexlaw
PALMER, J.
The State appeals the final order entered by the trial court dismissing a tampering charge filed against Jonathan Harper.1 ' Concluding that the trial court’s ruling was dependent upon case law which was subsequently disapproved by the Florida Supreme Court, we reverse.
Harper was arrested on charges of tampering with evidence based upon alleged instructions he gave to a passenger in his vehicle to throw marijuana and a marijuana pipe out the window while a traffic stop was being conducted. Harper filed a motion to dismiss the tampering charge pursuant to rule 3.190(b) of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure contending that the facts alleged in the information did not establish a prima facie case of guilt. To support his motion, Harper cited to Thomas v. State, 581 So. 2d 993 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), Jones v. State, 590 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), and Munroe v. State, 629 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993), all of which cited to Boice v. State, 560 So. 2d 1383 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) for the holding that the act of tossing drugs away in clear view of a law enforcement officer does not constitute the crime of tampering. The trial court granted Harper’s motion, stating that his prosecution for tampering was governed by the holding in Boice, and further citing to Jones, Thomas, and Munroe.
However, all four of these cases were disapproved by the Florida Supreme Court in State v. Jennings, 666 So. 2d 131, 133 (Fla.1995):
We disagree with Boice to the extent it can be read to mean that tossing evidence away in the presence of a law enforcement officer does not, as a matter of law, constitute a violation of the statute. Depending upon the circumstances, such an act could amount to tampering or concealing evidence. An affirmative act of throwing evidence away constitutes more than mere abandonment.
The Jennings Court also made an express mention of the rulings in Munroe, Jones, and Thomas:
Accordingly, we quash the decision below and remand for further proceedings. Additionally, we disapprove of Munroe v. State, 629 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Jones v. State, 590 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Thomas v. State, 581 So. 2d 993 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); and Boice v. State, 560 So. 2d 1383 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), to the extent those decisions conflict with our decision therein.
Id. at 134.
Accordingly, the trial court’s order granting Harper’s motion to dismiss is re versed and this matter is remanded for further proceedings.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
THOMPSON, C.J., and ORFINGER, R.B., J., concur. . § 918.13(l)(a), Fla. Slat. (1999).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Obas v. State, 935 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)…roying, concealing, or removing a “thing” within the meaning of section 918.13. Jennings, 666 So. 2d at 133. Shortly after our supreme court decided Jennings, the state appealed a trial court order dismissing a tampering charge in State v. Harper, 800 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001), in which the trial court had followed Boice. In Harper the defendant, during a traffic stop, instructed a passenger in his vehicle to throw drugs and paraphernalia out the window. The opinion does not state whether the evidence…
-
E.I. v. State, 25 So. 3d 625 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…must be some evidence of a specific intent to alter, destroy, or conceal the evidence. Evans, 997 So. 2d at 1284. In the absence of such evidence, the State proves only abandonment, not tampering. Id. The State relies primarily on State v. Harper, 800 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001), arguing that its facts are indistinguishable from those in this case and that its holding mandates affirmance here. In that case, Harper was the driver of a vehicle that was stopped for a traffic infraction. Id. As Harper slowed…
-
Chapman v. State, 36 So. 3d 822 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)…aw, constitute a violation of the statute. Depending upon the circumstances, such an act could amount to tampering or concealing evidence. An affirmative act of throwing evidence away constitutes more than mere abandonment. Id. In State v. Harper, 800 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001), the defendant had been arrested on charges of tampering with evidence based upon instructions he gave to a passenger in his vehicle to throw marijuana and a marijuana pipe out the window while a traffic stop was being conducted.…
Authorities Cited
- Boice v. State, 560 So. 2d 1383 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
- State v. Darrel Jennings, 666 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 1995)
- Simmons v. State, 666 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 1995)
- Thomas v. State, 581 So. 2d 993 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
- Jones v. State, 590 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Gretka v. State, 629 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)
- Munroe v. State, 629 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)