AFALIA PERKINS, ALIAS NAT PERKINS,
v.
STATE
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.
Afalia Perkins was convicted of possessing stolen property but the judgment failed to reflect the specific statutory offense charged. The Florida Supreme Court reversed and remanded because the judgment did not adjudicate guilt under the conditions required by the relevant statute—specifically, that the accused knowingly received or aided in concealment of stolen property.
The judgment must be reversed and remanded because it failed to adjudicate that the accused was guilty of possessing stolen property under the specific conditions that constitute the criminal offense—namely, knowingly receiving or aiding in concealment of property that had been previously stolen.
“The gist of the offense is the unlawful receiving or aiding in the concealment of property, goods and chattels which have been theretofore stolen when at the time of so receiving or aiding in the concealment of such property the accused then and there "well knowing" that the same had theretofore been stolen, taken and carried away.”
Establishes the essential elements of the statutory offense that must be adjudicated in the judgment
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAfalia Perkins was charged with unlawfully receiving and aiding in the concealment of two cases of hats valued at over fifty dollars that belonged to …
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 Felony Theft cases and more on FLexlaw
The plaintiff in error was convicted on the second count of an information charging as follows:
“And the said Fred Pine, County Solicitor for the County of Dade, prosecuting for the State of Florida, in the said county, under oath, information makes that Afalia Perkins, alias Nat Perkins, of the County of Dade and State of Florida, on the 26th day of April, A. D. 1935, in the County and State aforesaid did then and there unlawfully have, receive and aid in the concealment of 2 cases of hats, of miscellaneous sizes and shapes, of the value of more than Fifty Dollars, good and lawful money of the United States of America, a further and more particular description of *709said property being to the County Solicitor unknown, of the property, goods and chattels of one Nat Roth, which property had been theretofore stolen, he, the said Afalia Perkins, alias Nat Perkins, at the time of so having, receiving and aiding in the concealment of the said property, then and there well knowing that the same had theretofore been stolen, taken and carried away, contrary to the form of the Statute in such cases made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the State of Florida.”
The information sufficiently charged the offense denounced by Section 5138 R. G. S., 7239 C. G. L.
The evidence admitted without objection was sufficient to show that the act of stealing the property was a felony and therefore the provisions of Section 5139 R. G. S., 7240 C. G. L., are not applicable.
No exceptions were noted to any evidence introduced, nor to the charge or instruction given the jury, nor were any special instructions requested by the defendant.
The verdict found the defendant, Afalia Perkins, alias Nat Perkins, guilty as charged in the second count. The judgment in part was as follows:
“It appearing unto this Court that you, Afalia Perkins, alias Nat Perkins, have been regularly tried and convicted of Possession of Stolen Property.
“It Is, Therefore, the Judgment of the law and it is hereby adjudged that you are and stand guilty of said offense.”
It, therefore, appears that there is no judgment of conviction of the crime charged in the second count of the information. The gist of the offense is the unlawful receiving or aiding in the concealment of property, goods and chattels which have been theretofore stolen when at the time of so receiving or aiding in the concealment of such *710property the accused then and there “well knowing” that the same had theretofore been stolen, taken and carried away. The judgment does not adjudicate that the accused is guilty of the possession of stolen property under conditions which make such having, receiving and concealing a criminal offense.
It, therefore, follows that the judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded with directions that the accused be delivered unto the custody of the Sheriff of Dade County, Florida, and by him presented to the Criminal Court of Record at its next regular-or special Term to be dealt with according to law.
So ordered.
Ellis, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
Whitfield, C. J., and Brown and Davis, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mathis v. State, 134 Fla. 352 (Fla. 1938)…intent to steal. The judgment, supra, is defective in omitting a material element of the offense as charged, and the cause is reversed, with directions that a proper and lawful judgment be entered herein. See Section 7239 C. G. L.; Perkins v. State, 126 Fla. 707, 171 So. 655. It is so ordered. Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Chapman, J. J., concur. Ellis, C. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.…
-
Biesendorfer v. State, 227 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969)…erty. The judgment is defective in omitting a material element of the offense as charged and must he reversed and this cause remanded for entry of a proper and lawful judgment. Mathis v. State, 1938, 134 Fla. 352, 184 So. 89; Perkins v. State, 1936, 126 Fla. 707, 171 So. 655. Appellant, sentenced to the maximum penalty prescribed by F.S.1967, Section 811.16, F.S.A., asserts that since he is a first offender and since the property was returned to its lawful owner (with the exception of that retained by the…
-
Cancela v. State, 147 Fla. 500 (Fla. 1941)…nadequate. See Harris v. State, 75 Fla. 527, 78 So. R. 526; Timmons v. State, filed January 18, 1929, reported 119 So. R. 363; Mathis et al. v. State 67 Fla. 277, 64 So. R. 944.” “Reversed and remanded .for a proper judgment.” In Perkins v. State, 126 Fla. 707, 171 Sou. 655, the record was considered and though the judgment was held ineffective as a judgment of the defendant’s guilt of the crime charged, the judgment was reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings, which meant that it was rema…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence