ROBERT LEE TROUTNER, 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.
This case reviews whether a victim's fear was sufficiently proven to support a robbery conviction. The court affirmed the conviction, finding that the victim's testimony of being "very scared" while a loaded gun was pointed at him constituted competent evidence of fear.
Yes, the victim's testimony that he was "very scared" while a loaded gun was pointed at him provided sufficient, competent evidence of fear to sustain the robbery conviction.
“The record reveals that the defendant had a loaded gun, which he pointed at the victim. The victim testified that he "was very scared" and that he gave the defendant certain money, which was the subject matter of the alleged robbery.”
Establishes the core facts of the incident and the victim's state of mind.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant pointed a loaded gun at the victim and demanded money. The victim testified that he was "very scared" and consequently gave the defendan…
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 Robbery cases and more on FLexlaw
The sole issue on this appeal is whether there was sufficient, competent evidence for the trial judge to find that a victim of an alleged robbery was induced by fear into delivering money to the defendant.
The record reveals that the defendant had a loaded gun, which he pointed at the victim. The victim testified that he “was very scared” and that he gave the defendant certain money, which was the subject matter of the alleged robbery.
Under the authority of Montsdoca v. State, 84 Fla. 82, 93 So. 157 (1922); Thomas v. State, Fla.App.1966, 183 So.2d 297; and Flagler v. State, Fla.App.1966, 189 So.2d 212; aff’d Fla.1967, 198 So.2d 313, we think there was sufficient, competent evidence before the trial judge to sustain his determination that the victim was in fear and to establish this necessary element of the alleged robbery.
*634It has been stated that “all inferences to be drawn from the evidence are to be in favor of the verdict or judgment of guilt” on an appeal from such verdict, or judgment. Crum v. State, Fla.App.1965, 172 So.2d 24.
The judgment herein appealed is, therefore,
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Crum v. State, 172 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- Montsdoca v. State, 84 Fla. 82 (Fla. 1922)
- Flagler v. State, 198 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 1967)
- Thomas v. State, 183 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)
- Flagler v. State, 189 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966)