JEROME MULLINS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Jerome Mullins was convicted of possessing forged bills under Florida Statute § 881.11, which requires proof of intent to pass the counterfeit currency. The appellate court reversed the conviction because the state failed to present any evidence of Mullins' intent to utter or pass the false bills, an essential element of the offense.
The conviction must be reversed because the state failed to present any evidence of the required intent element. A judgment of acquittal should have been granted because the state did not prove each element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt.
[1] A conviction for possession of a forged bill requires proof of the defendant's intent to utter and pass the false bill.
[2] A judgment of acquittal must be granted when the state fails to present evidence supporting an essential element of the charged offense.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“in order to present a prima facie case the state must prove each and every element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt; when the state fails to meet this burden the case should not be submitted to the jury, and a judgment of acquittal should be granted”
Establishes the legal standard that all elements of an offense must be proven and failure to do so requires acquittal
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMullins was arrested in possession of four bills: a legitimate one-dollar bill, a legitimate one-hundred dollar bill, a printer-copied plastic laminat…
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 Third Degree Felony cases and more on FLexlaw
FLETCHER, Judge.
Jerome Mullins was charged with one count of possession of a forged bill in violation of section 881.11, Florida Statutes (2002).1 This section reads:
“Whoever brings into this state or has in his or her possession a false, forged, or counterfeit bill, check, draft, or note in the similitude of the bills or notes payable to the bearer thereof or to the order of any person issued by or for any bank or banking company established in this state, or within the United States, or any foreign province, state or government, with intent to utter and pass the same or to render the same current as true, knowing the same to be false, forged, or counterfeit, commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.088, or s. 775.084.”
At trial, the state presented the bills in question and the jury determined that the bills met the statutory definition of “false, forged, or counterfeit.”2 However, there is no record evidence of Mullins’ intent to pass the false bills. The record shows only that Mullins made no admission that he intended to pass the bills, and that the state’s witness (the arresting officer) was unable to testify as to Mullins’ intent. Because there is nothing in the record to support the element of intent necessary for violation of section 831.11, Mullins’ motion for judgment of acquittal should have been granted. See, e.g., Butler v. State, 715 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)(in order to present a prima facie case the state must prove each and every element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt; when the state fails to meet this burden the case should not be submitted to the jury, and a judgment of acquittal should be granted). We therefore reverse, with directions that Mullins’ conviction and sentence in case number 01-35375 be vacated.
Reversed and remanded.
. A second count against Mullins was nol prossed.
. The evidence consisted of the four bills which were in Mullins’ possession at the time of his arrest: a legitimate one-dollar bill, a legitimate one-hundred dollar bill, a printer-copied, plastic laminated, one-sided one-hundred dollar bill (with the same serial number as the legitimate bill), and a printer-copied one-sided one dollar note with a color bar chart on the opposite side.