MICHAEL VICTOR DELTORO, 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.
Michael Victor Deltoro was convicted of battery on a law enforcement officer and obstructing/opposing an officer with violence following a bicycle accident. The court affirmed, holding that even if the officer's initial detention was technically unlawful, Deltoro's violent resistance to the officer was itself unlawful and sufficiently proven.
The convictions are affirmed because the evidence was sufficient. Even assuming the officer's initial detention of Deltoro was technically unlawful, Deltoro's violent resistance to the officer constituted unlawful battery and obstruction regardless of any technical illegality in the officer's initial action.
[1] A motion to dismiss under Rule 3.190(c)(4) of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure is not a substitute for trial and should not be granted if disputed facts or inferen…
[2] The question of whether a law enforcement officer was acting in the lawful performance of their duties is a question of fact that should not be resolved by a motion to di…
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“Even assuming the officers in this case did not have reasonable suspicion to detain Mr. Lang for auto theft, Mr. Lang resisted the officer's stop with violence and committed a battery on a police officer. This act against the officer was unlawful regardless of any potential technical illegality in the officer's initial stop.”
Establishes the holding that violent resistance to an officer is unlawful even if the officer's initial detention lacked lawful basis
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDeltoro was involved in a bicycle accident. Pedestrians flagged down an officer, but Deltoro refused to cooperate and tried to walk away from the scen…
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 Obstructing Or Opposing An Officer With Violence cases and more on FLexlaw
FULMER, Chief Judge.
Michael Victor Deltoro challenges the sufficiency of the evidence for his convictions for battery on a law enforcement officer and obstructing or opposing an officer with violence. We affirm because we conclude that the evidence was sufficient notwithstanding any technical illegality in the officer’s actions.
Evidence at trial showed that Deltoro was involved in a bicycle accident. Pedestrians who witnessed the accident flagged down an officer. Deltoro, however, refused to cooperate with the officer and tried to walk away from the scene. The officer called for EMS to respond to the scene. When the officer forcibly attempted to detain Deltoro against his will until the EMS-personnel arrived, Deltoro reacted violently toward the officer. Deltoro argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal on both charges because the State failed to prove that the officer was acting in the lawful execution of a legal duty. Deltoro asserts that the officer acted as a mere citizen. The State responds that the motion was correctly denied because the officer was performing a legal duty.
We conclude that based on our opinion in Lang v. State, 826 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), our result would be the same whether the officer acted lawfully in de-taming Deltoro against his will or whether, technically, the officer acted unlawfully. In Lang, we stated:
Even assuming the officers in this case did not have reasonable suspicion to detain Mr. Lang for auto theft, Mr. Lang resisted the officer’s stop with violence and committed a battery on a police officer. This act against the officer was unlawful regardless of any potential technical illegality in the officer’s initial stop. See, e.g., Nesmith v. State, 616 So. 2d 170, 171 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).
Id. at 435; see also Perry v. State, 846 So. 2d 584 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (holding that officers’ noncompliance with strip search statute was not a defense to resisting an officer with violence), review granted, 894 So. 2d 971 (Fla.2005); Tillman v. State, 807 So. 2d 106, 110 (Fla. 5th DCA) (“[W]hile the state must prove that the alleged victim was a law enforcement officer who was engaged in the lawful execution or performance of a legal duty, the technical illegality of that action does not justify resisting with violence or battering the officer.”), review granted, 835 So. 2d 271 (Fla.2002). But see Taylor v. State, 740 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (reversing convictions for battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting an officer with violence because the evidence was insufficient to support a finding that the officer was engaged in a lawful duty).
Affirmed.
SALCINES and SILBERMAN, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Clauson Conway Taylor v. State, 740 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Tillman v. State, 807 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)
- Nesmith v. State, 616 So. 2d 170 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)
- Lovett v. Forman, 894 So. 2d 971 (Fla. 2005)
- Gooch Support Sys., Inc. v. Mahaleel Lee Luster, 826 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)
- Lang v. State, 826 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)
- Underwriters AT Interest AT Lloyd's a/s/o Tech Data v. Watkins Motor Lines, Inc., 846 So. 2d 584 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)
- Perry v. State, 846 So. 2d 584 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)