ROBERT W. GILDAY, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 held that the record lacked sufficient evidence to support the appellant's conviction for robbery and larceny.
The appellant and another individual went to a victim's room, an altercation occurred, and the other individual took valuables. The record did not est…
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.
By this appeal the appellant seeks review of a conviction subsequent to being informed against for the commission of the crime of robbery and larceny. Also informed against in the same information was one Kerry Lee Allen, who was convicted and which conviction has this date been upheld by an opinion of this court.
It appears from the evidence that both Allen and Gilday went to- the room of one Schwartz for the purpose of committing an immoral act. That, after they arrived there, an altercation took place between Allen and Schwartz, whereupon Allen took certain valuables belonging to Schwartz and fled. The record fails to establish that Gilday in any way contributed to the forcible taking of the valuables or acted in concert with Allen in the commission of the robbery. Therefore, notwithstanding the fact that Allen’s conviction is this day affirmed, we find that the record fails to contain sufficient evidence of the participation in the robbery and larceny to convict Gilday.
The State relies heavily on the aider and abettor statute, § 776.011, Fla.Stat., F.S.A. Certainly if the evidence indicated that Allen and Gilday had gone to Schwartz’ room with the preconceived plan to commit robbery and larceny, then Gilday would be guilty as charged notwithstanding the lack of active participation. However, it appears from the evidence that the robbery was a spur of the moment decision by Allen after they arrived at the premises.
Therefore, the record failing to contain sufficient evidence to support the conviction of the appellant herein, same is hereby reversed. See: Moore v. State, 152 Fla. 295, 11 So.2d 486; Rosenblum v. State, Fla.1951, 55 So.2d 119.
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ira Douglas v. State, 214 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…Sands pleaded guilty to the breaking and entering and the robbery. The trial court found Douglas not guilty of the attempt to run the victim down. We think the following cases require reversal of Douglas’ convictions: Gilday v. State, Fla.App.1964, 168 So. 2d 205; Espinoza v. State, Fla.App.1966, 183 So. 2d 560; Williams v. State, Fla.App.1968, 206 So. 2d 446. The substantial holding of these cases is that before an accused may be convicted as an aider and abettor under § 776.011, Fla.Stat.,3 F.S.A., his int…
-
J. H. v. State, 370 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…nable inference that the defendant had no knowledge of the crime until it actually occurred, and thus that he did not intend to assist in its commission. Lockett v. State, 262 So. 2d 253 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972); Douglas v. State, supra; Gilday v. State, 168 So. 2d 205 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964). Indeed the facts in this case are, if anything, even weaker than those in Lockett and Douglas. In each of those cases the defendant was a “wheel man” who drove the actual perpetrator to or from the scene of the crime and thus act…
-
Williams v. State, 206 So. 2d 446 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968)…llant Harvey Williams drove Nimrod Grace to the Coral Rock Bar pursuant to a preconceived plan to commit a crime. If so, he is guilty as a principal in the first degree, Hornbeck v. State, Fla.1955, 77 So. 2d 876, 878; Gilday v. State, Fla.App.1964, 168 So. 2d 205. As to appellant Williams’ participation in the alleged crime, all evidence was circumstantial. In such a case the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis except the guilt of the accused, Chason v. State, 1941, 148 Fla. 540, 4 So. 2d 691.…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Moore v. State, 152 Fla. 295 (Fla. 1943)