PAUL FOURNIER, 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.
Paul Fournier was convicted by jury of attempted robbery and battery after grabbing a woman in her car and asking for money for beer. The appellate court affirmed the battery conviction but reversed the attempted robbery conviction, finding insufficient evidence that Fournier intended to take the victim's property.
The court reversed Fournier's attempted robbery conviction because the State failed to present competent, substantial evidence of his intent to take property. While begging for money aggressively may constitute battery, it does not establish the specific intent required for robbery or attempted robbery.
[1] A prima facie case for robbery requires proof that the accused took the victim’s property with the intent to permanently deprive the victim of that property and that, in…
[2] To prove attempted robbery, the State must show that the accused formed the intent to take the victim’s property and committed some overt act to accomplish that goal.
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“To prove attempted robbery, the State must show that the accused formed the intent to take the victim's property and committed some overt act to accomplish that goal.”
Establishes the legal standard for attempted robbery that the court applies
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFournier approached the victim's car at a traffic stop in a parking lot. He reached through her driver's side window, grabbed her shoulder and arm, sh…
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 Intent To Permanently Deprive cases and more on FLexlaw
NORTHCUTT, Judge.
A jury convicted Paul Fournier of attempted robbery and battery. We affirm his battery conviction without discussion, but reverse his conviction for attempted robbery.
The victim testified that she was driving home from work and had stopped at a traffic sign in her employer’s parking lot. She noticed Fournier standing across the street. He appeared to be speaking to her, so she reached over to turn down her radio in order to hear him. When she looked up, he was right next to her driver’s side window. Fournier reached in the window, grabbed the victim by her shoulder and arm, shook her and said he needed money for a beer. The victim testified:
He was kind of like, “Hey, I need it. Can I please have money for beer?” Kind of please. Kind of like, hey — I don’t want to say like really forceful. He was like, “Hey, I need it for beer. Can I please have fifty cents for beer? I don’t have any money. I’m sorry.”
The victim was terrified and immediately drove away without giving Former any money.
The State charged Fournier with burglary of a conveyance with assault or battery,1 and attempted robbery.2 On the burglary count, the jurors found him guilty of the lesser included offense of battery. They declared him guilty of attempted robbery.
A prima facie case for robbery requires proof that the accused took the victim’s property with the intent to permanently deprive her of that property and that, in the course of the taking, the accused used force, violence, assault, or intimidation. § 812.13(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (1999). To prove attempted robbery, the State must show that the accused formed the intent to take the victim’s property and committed some overt act to accomplish that goal. Green v. State, 655 So. 2d 208 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). Here, the State did not present competent, substantial evidence of Fournier’s intent to take property. The circuit court should have granted his motion for judgment of acquittal on the attempted robbery charge.
We recognize that a defendant’s intent is generally a jury question. But the State must present some competent, substantial evidence from which the jury could infer the defendant’s intent to deprive the victim of property. See Rosengarten v. State, 166 So. 2d 183, 184 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964). Here, the victim’s testimony about Fournier’s statements supplied the only evidence of his intent. She did not say that he demanded money. Rather, her account showed only that he begged for money, albeit aggressively. Cf Thomas v. State, 183 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966). Although Fournier reached into the victim’s car, he did not attempt to take any of her property. Had he done so, his acts in combination with his statements would have been sufficient to show his intent to steal. But Fournier’s statements, by themselves, were insufficient to prove attempted robbery. We reverse Fournier’s conviction for attempted robbery and remand for resentencing on the battery conviction alone.
STRINGER and COVINGTON, JJ„ Concur. . § 810.02(2)(a), Fla. Stat (1999).
. §§ 812.13(1), 777.04, Fla. Stat. (1999).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Grant v. State, 138 So. 3d 1079 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)…182, 185 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. dismissed, 312 So. 2d 761 (Fla.1975)). However, the State “must present some competent, substantial evidence from which the jury could infer the defendant’s intent to deprive the victim of property.” Fournier v. State, 827 So. 2d 399, 401 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). Mere suspicion, by itself, is insufficient. Ballard v. State, 923 So. 2d 475, 482 (Fla.2006). Grant relies primarily upon Rose v. State, 68 So. 3d 377 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011), as an example of unsubstantiated intent.2 However,…
-
Davis v. State, 207 So. 3d 177 (Fla. 2016)…obbery must be supported by “competent, substantial evidence from which the [finder of fact] could infer the defendant’s intent to deprive the victim of property.” Grant v. State, 138 So. 3d 1079, 1084 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (quoting Fournier v. State, 827 So. 2d 399, 401 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)). Such intent “may be proved by considering the conduct of the accused ,.. before, during, and after the alleged attempt along with any other relevant circumstances.” Franqui, 699 So. 2d at 1317 (citing Cooper v. Wainwright,…
-
Green v. State, 850 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)…y. § 812.13(1), Fla. Stat. (1999). To prove attempted robbery, the state must show that the accused formed the intent to take the victim’s property and committed some overt act to accomplish that goal. § 777.04, Fla. Stat. (1999); Fournier v. State, 827 So. 2d 399, 400-01 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). We recognize that Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.510, provides, in part, that a “jury may convict the defendant of: (a) an attempt to commit the offense if such attempt is an offense and is supported by the evidenc…
Authorities Cited
- Thomas v. State, 183 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)
- Rosengarten v. State, 166 So. 2d 183 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- Green v. State, 655 So. 2d 208 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)