JERRY STEPHENS, 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.
The court reversed the attempted burglary conviction because tools found on the defendant lacked evidentiary connection to the crime, but affirmed the resisting arrest conviction as harmless error.
Evidence of tools possessed by the defendant shortly after an attempted burglary is inadmissible when there is no connection shown between the items and the crime.
[1] Evidence of tools or implements possessed by a defendant shortly after a burglary is irrelevant and inadmissible when no connection is established between the items and t…
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 intelligence“[T]he evidence that appellant possessed a screwdriver and gloves shortly after the burglary, and most probably during the burglary, was irrelevant. There was simply no connection shown between appellant's possession of the items and the crime charged.”
Court citing Lavallee v. State to support exclusion of tools lacking connection to the crime.
Appellant was apprehended shortly after an attempted burglary of a dwelling where entry was gained through an open bathroom window and no property was…
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 Fruits Of The Crime cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant challenges his convictions and sentences for attempted burglary of a dwelling and resisting an officer without violence. We agree with Appellant that the lower court erred by admitting into evidence certain “tools” found in Appellant’s possession when he was apprehended shortly after the attempted burglary. The perpetrator gained entry through an open bathroom window and no property was taken from the residence. Therefore, the lower court improperly admitted Appellant’s duffle bag and some of its contents, as well as items found on Appellant’s person, because there was no evidence linking these items to the crime, either as instruments or fruits of the crime. See Lavallee v. State, 958 So.2d 509, 511 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (“[T]he evidence that appellant possessed a screwdriver and gloves shortly after the burglary, and most probably during the burglary, was irrelevant. There was simply no connection shown between appellant’s possession of the items and the crime charged.”). Accordingly, we reverse the attempted burglary conviction and remand for a new trial. We affirm the conviction for resisting arrest, concluding that the erroneous admission was harmless as it pertained to the resisting arrest conviction. See Simmons v. State, 552 So.2d 268 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989) (affirming convictions for sale of cocaine, but reversing and remanding for new trial conviction for possession with intent to sell as error only affected that conviction).
We expressly reject Appellant’s contention that a judgment of acquittal should have been granted.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.
SAWAYA and MONACO, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Simmons v. State, 552 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- Lavallee v. State, 958 So. 2d 509 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)