JERRY M. SANNER, 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.
Appellant's conviction for fleeing and eluding under section 316.1935(3)(a) is reversed because the state failed to prove the patrol vehicle had agency insignia and jurisdictional markings prominently displayed, but the conviction is reduced to a third degree felony under section 316.1935(1), and the habitual offender qualification is affirmed.
The state's failure to prove that the patrol vehicle had agency insignia and other jurisdictional markings prominently displayed requires reversal of the fleeing and eluding conviction under section 316.1935(3)(a), though the conviction may be reduced to a third degree felony under section 316.1935(1).
[1] A conviction for fleeing and eluding under section 316.1935(3)(a) requires proof that the patrol vehicle had agency insignia and other jurisdictional markings prominently…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was convicted of fleeing and eluding a law enforcement officer and was also qualified as a habitual offender based on prior offenses.…
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 Fleeing And Eluding cases and more on FLexlaw
On Motion fob Rehearing
We grant appellant’s motion for rehearing, withdraw our previously issued opinion and substitute the following in its place.
Appellant challenges his conviction for fleeing and eluding a law enforcement officer under section 316.1935(3)(a), Florida Statutes (2006), claiming that the state failed to prove an essential element of the crime, namely that a patrol vehicle in the chase had “agency insignia and other jurisdictional markings prominently displayed on the vehicle.... ” We agree that the state failed to put on proof of this statutory element, requiring reversal. See Ers *935 kine v. State, 23 So.3d 1207, 1208-09 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009); Jackson v. State, 818 So.2d 539, 542 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Gorsuch v. State, 797 So.2d 649, 650-51 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). We therefore reverse with directions to reduce the conviction to a third degree felony under 316.1935(1).
We affirm as to appellant’s challenge to his habitual offender qualification offenses, finding that the state sufficiently proved them and that appellant’s attorney conceded that appellant qualified for habitual offender status.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded for resentencing in accordance with this opinion.
WARNER, LEVINE and CONNER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hanson v. State, 92 So. 3d 288 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)…and the jury necessarily found that the elements of such lesser offense were proven, we remand, pursuant to section 924.34, Florida Statutes (2010), for the trial court to enter a judgment of conviction for that offense. See Slack; Sanner v. State, 63 So. 3d 934 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011); Erskine v. State, 23 So. 3d 1207 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009). REVERSED and REMANDED. EVANDER and COHEN, JJ. and MONACO, D.A., Senior Judge, concur.…
-
Ellis v. State, 258 So. 3d 491 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)
Authorities Cited
- Jackson v. State, 818 So. 2d 539 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)
- Nestor Moise v. State, 797 So. 2d 649 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)
- Erskine v. State, 23 So. 3d 1207 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)