LEON ANDREW SIMS, PETITIONER,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT

Citator

Cited By

• Rodriguez v. State, 147 So. 3d 1066 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)
  …t “inconsequential or inherent in the nature of the felony [sought to be furthered by the kidnapping].” Faison v. State, 426 So. 2d 963, 966 (Fla.1983) (quoting Harkins v. State, 380 So. 2d 524, 528 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)); see also Frederick v. State, 931 So. 2d 967, 969 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (explaining the reasoning and holding of Fai-son). This substantiality of confinement factor enunciated in Faison, however, is germane only when the charge of kidnapping is brought under subsection (a)2, where it is alleged…
• Gray v. State, 939 So. 2d 1095 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)
  …l to the robberies); Elozar v. State, 825 So. 2d 490, 491 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (confining employees in an open safe during robbery was not kidnapping, because they were “free to come out when the armed robbers left the premises”); Frederick v. State, 931 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (confining two employees in a closed freezer for duration of the robbery was insufficient to establish kidnapping). In the case at bar, Gray violently dragged the victim around the store for the purpose of finding the keys that w…
• Armistar J. Cole v. State, 942 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)
  …if a door is closed and the victim is ordered not to come out, is insufficient as a matter of law to sustain a conviction for kidnapping. See, e.g., Berry, 668 So. 2d at 969; Goff v. State, 616 So. 2d 551, 552 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Frederick v. State, 931 So. 2d 967, 969-70 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); Elozar v. State, 825 So. 2d 490, 491 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). In reaching this conclusion, the courts have determined that such movement is likely to be involved in any robbery, and there can be no kidnapping when “the only c…