MARCEL S. SMITH, APPELLANT,
v.
JAMES V. CROSBY, JR., SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 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.
Smith was convicted of attempted burglary among other charges and appealed solely the burglary conviction. The court affirmed, holding that there was sufficient evidence that Smith's entry into the victim's home was obtained by fraud or pretext, satisfying the entry element of burglary despite the victim's initial consent.
There was sufficient evidence to support a prima facie case of entry by means of fraud, deceit, or pretense. The facts—including the perpetrators bringing concealed weapons and duct tape, coordinated immediate attack without conversation, and their presence in a house with valuable equipment—support that the victim's consent was obtained by pretext rather than representing genuine intent to use the recording studio.
[1] Entry into a dwelling with consent obtained by fraud, deceit, or pretense can support a conviction for burglary.
[2] Evidence that perpetrators brought concealed weapons and restraints into a dwelling, and immediately attacked the occupant after gaining entry under a false pretense, is…
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 conclude that there is sufficient evidence to state a prima facie case of entry by means of fraud, deceit, or pretense.”
Establishes the core holding that even though entry was initially consented to, the manner of obtaining that consent through deception was sufficient to support attempted burglary.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSmith, his brother, and a friend went to the victim's home ostensibly to use a recording studio. Although entry was initially with the victim's consen…
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 Robbery With A Firearm cases and more on FLexlaw
STONE, J.
Smith was convicted of attempted first-degree murder with a firearm, attempted burglary of a dwelling with a firearm and with an assault and battery, and attempted robbery with a firearm. He appeals only the conviction of attempted burglary. The sole issue on appeal is alleged error in the trial court’s failure to enter a judgment of acquittal as to the burglary charge. We affirm.
The record reflects that Smith, his brother, and his friend went to the victim’s home, ostensibly to use a recording studio. It is undisputed that their entry was with the victim’s consent. We conclude that there is-sufficient evidence to state a prima facie case of entry by means of fraud, deceit, or pretense.
Smith emphasizes the evidence supporting a conclusion that the criminal intent was formed after entry. The perpetrators paid the victim cash to cover the expense of the electricity they would be using; they used the studio for the entire hour, and the victim even made a tape for them.
After an hour of recording, the victim returned to the studio and told them their recording time had expired. At that time, Smith struck the victim with a gun and instructed him to get on the floor. The three men immediately tried to restrain the victim; one took duct tape out of his overcoat pocket and started to tape the victim’s ankles. A struggle ensued and the victim got out of their grasp, at which time Smith shot him several times.
The facts supporting entry by pretext are that the perpetrators brought the guns and duct tape with them; these were concealed in the pockets of a heavy coat (on a hot day); they surrounded and attacked the victim in unison, immediately taking out the duct tape to tape his ankles, using the gun, all without conversation and in a house containing thousands of dollars worth of recording equipment.
We conclude, taking the evidence and inferences from the facts most favorably to the state, that there is sufficient evidence to support a prima facie case that the victim’s consent to their entry was obtained by pretext. We have considered Delgado v. State, 776 So. 2d 233 (Fla.2000), relied on by Smith, but deem it inapposite.
FARMER and May, JJ., concur.