JAMES C. BIAS, 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.
James Bias, a police officer in Cocoa, Florida, was convicted of unlawfully accepting unauthorized compensation in violation of Florida Statutes § 838.06. The appellate court affirmed his conviction and five-year sentence, finding that evidence of a bribe accepted in exchange for releasing detainees was sufficient and that all procedural requirements were met.
The appellate court held that the evidence was ample to establish that Bias accepted money as a reward for releasing the detainees, that his release of these individuals constituted official conduct done in return for a bribe, and that the information adequately apprised Bias of the charges against him.
“The evidence is ample to substantiate that the defendant accepted the $25 in marked currency as a reward for releasing the said Hunter, Petty and Flowers. The act of releasing these prisoners was official conduct, and the testimony amply supported the findings of the trial judge that said release was done in return for a bribe.”
Establishes that the evidence supported the core finding that Bias accepted money (a bribe) in exchange for performing official duties (releasing detainees).
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWhile on duty as a police officer, Bias stopped a vehicle and told three occupants they would be fined: $25 for driving without a license, $25 for all…
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 Motion To Quash Information cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant-defendant was charged with unlawfully accepting unauthorized compensation as a police officer of City of Cocoa, Florida, in violation of Section 838.06, Florida Statutes, F.S.A.
The cause was tried before the trial judge sitting as the court and jury. The appellant was convicted and sentenced to serve 5 years in the state penitentiary.
After the conviction and sentence the defendant filed motions for new trial and judgment notwithstanding the verdict. *64These were denied, and thereupon this appeal was taken.
The appellant relies for reversal upon •seven assignments of error. The first through the fourth assignments of error ■go to the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict, judgment and sentence. The fifth assignment is to the effect that the appellant did not receive a fair and impartial trial. The 6th and 7th ■complain that the trial court erred in not ¡granting appellant a bill of particulars and also erred in denying defendant’s motion -to quash the information.
The record before, us reveals that the defendant, as a police officer of the City of ■Cocoa, Florida, while on duty in his patrol •car, stopped certain individuals. After ■stopping them he pulled in behind the car which was operated by one G. B. Hunter .and asked to see said Hunter’s driver’s license. Upon learning that Hunter had -no driver’s license, the defendant told 'Hunter there would be a fine of $25 for not having the driver’s license and likewise advised Clarence Petty, owner of the •car and passenger therein, that he would be fined $25 for letting Hunter drive his •car. In addition, defendant at that time advised one James Flowers, also a passenger therein, that there would be a fine of •$25 against him for being intoxicated.
After determining that these three individuals had only $25 collectively, the defendant accepted this sum of money and -told them to have the remaining $50 ready the next time he saw them, and thereupon ■the defendant released the individuals. The Chief of Police of Cocoa, Florida, was advised by Petty of the above sum-marized conduct of the defendant.
Subsequently Clarence Petty, in collaboration with said Chief of Police, gave to •the defendant an additional $25 of marked currency as a settlement for the balance •of the fines above referred to.
The evidence is ample to substantiate -that the defendant accepted the $25 in marked currency as a reward for releasing the said Hunter, Petty and Flowers. The act of releasing these prisoners was official conduct, and the testimony amply supported the findings of the trial judge that said release was done in return for a bribe. We find no error in assignments one through five. It is obvious that the information in this case was patterned after the one set forth and approved in the case of Younghans v. State, Fla.App.1957, 97 So.2d 31. The information now being considered gave appellant full and complete apprisal of the charge filed against him, and we find no error in assignments six and seven.
The appellant having failed to establish existence of any reversible error, the judgment and sentence is affirmed.
KANNER, Acting C. J., and SHANNON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Castillo, 877 So. 2d 690 (Fla. 2004)…state officer), approved, 529 So. 2d 269, 272 n. 3 (Fla.1988); Garrett v. State, 508 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (finding the circumstantial evidence legally insufficient to support a conviction for receiving unlawful compensation); Bias v. State, 118 So. 2d 63 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960) (affirming an unlawful compensation conviction where the officer “fined” a car’s occupants $75 for various offenses, took the $25 proffered, and released the occupants, telling them he expected the rest to be paid later). In Gerr…
-
Kelly v. State of Fla. ex rel. Bernard Mason, 137 So. 2d 608 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)…down’ or suppress complaints that were made to the City of Miami Police Department or the City Manager’s Office * * *.” We do not think that the distinction is sufficient to destroy the criminal nature of the offer. Cf. Bias v. State, Fla.App.1960, 118 So. 2d 63; Younghans v. State, Fla.App. 1957, 97 So. 2d 31. The statute requires only that the offer be to procure the influence of the officer. Appellee next urges that the “Police Department” and the “City Manager’s Office” are not individuals and that the…
-
Morris v. State, 171 So. 2d 39 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965)…rt, the briefs and record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court hereby appealed is affirmed. See Bias v. State of Florida, (Fla.App.1960) 118 So. 2d 63; Younghans v. State of Florida, (Fla.App.1957) 97 So. 2d 31; Richards v. State of Florida, 144 Fla. 177, 197 So. 772. STURGIS, C. J., and WIGGINTON and CARROLL, DONALD K., JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Younghans v. State, 97 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 3d DCA 1957)