STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF DADE, PETITIONER,
v.
THOMAS EDWARD WHITE, RESPONDENT

Fla. 3d DCA | 1968-10-29
No. 68-604
Before CHARLES CARROLL, C. J., and HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.
214 So. 2d 884 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1968) Caution
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

The State sought certiorari to overturn a Circuit Court's reversal of White's misdemeanor convictions for careless driving, leaving the scene of an accident, and driving under the influence. The District Court held that minor discrepancies in the specific street address between the charging documents and trial testimony did not constitute a fatal variance that would require reversal, as the defendant suffered no prejudice.


Holding

The variance was not fatal and did not require reversal. The court held that because the place was shown to be within the jurisdiction of the court, the exact location within the county was not essential, and there was no evidence the defendant was misled, surprised, or embarrassed in his defense preparation, the variance was immaterial.


Key Quotes

“While the evidence showed the deceased received the fatal injuries in the city and county, as alleged, there was a variance as to the name of the street, which appears to have been called Broadway, or Dixie Highway, at that point. As the place was shown to be within the jurisdiction of the court, and as the averment of the exact location within the county was not essential to the indictment, the variance as to the name of the street or highway was immaterial”

Establishes the legal standard that variances in exact location are immaterial when the place is within jurisdiction and the defendant suffers no prejudice

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

White was charged with three traffic misdemeanors occurring on S.W. 8th Street in Coral Gables, Dade County. The charging documents alleged the offens…

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.


Opinion of the Court
SWANN, Judge.

SWANN, Judge.

Thomas Edward White was convicted and sentenced in the Metropolitan Court of Dade County, Florida, for careless driving by failure to have his vehicle under control resulting in an accident, leaving the scene of an accident with unattended vehicles, and driving under the influence of alcohol. He appealed these misdemeanor convictions to the Circuit Court and an order of reversal was rendered in his favor. The state now seeks a writ of certiorari from the order of reversal.

The three Metropolitan Dade County Uniform traffic complaints and summons charged White with operating a certain Ford motor vehicle at “4900 S.W. 8th Street, City of Coral Gables, Dade County, Florida.”

The order of reversal stated essentially that there was a material variance when the specific location of the accident charged in the complaint and summons, differed from that which was established by the testimony of the various witnesses.

Here there is evidence that the defendant was driving his car on S.W. 8th Street at the time and date set forth in the summons and complaint. There was testimony that two cars were struck by the defendant’s car while they were parked on S.W. 8th Street. One witness testified his car was struck while parked at 5148 S.W. 8th Street, but corrected this by saying it “was just west of Granada Boulevard.” The investigating officer from the Coral Gables Police Department stated he “received a call to an accident which had occurred at the location of approximately the 4900 block of S.W. 8th Street.” The defendant drove his car east “about 150 yards” from the scene of the first point of impact.

In Cannon v. State, 91 Fla. 214, 107 So. 360, 363 (1926), which involved an indictment for manslaughter, the court said:

“While the evidence showed the deceased received the fatal injuries in the city and county, as alleged, there was a variance *885as to the name of the street, which appears to have been called Broadway, or Dixie Highway, at that point. As the place was shown to be within the jurisdiction of the court, and as the averment of the exact location within the county was not essential to the indictment, the variance as to the name of the street or highway was immaterial; nor does it appear that the defendant was misled thereby or embarrassed in the preparation of her defense.” [Emphasis added.]

See also Hunter v. State, Fla.App.1967, 200 So.2d 577.

There was no evidence here that the defendant was misled, surprised, or embarrassed in the preparation of his defense; and we do not find that there was a fatal variance between the allegata and probata.

The writ of certiorari is hereby granted, the order of reversal is quashed and the cause remanded with directions that the judgments be affirmed.

It is so ordered.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Royce Earl Atwell v. State, 739 So. 2d 1166 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
    …Crim. P. 3.140(o). Compare Grissom v. State, 405 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981) (upholding conviction for grand theft, upon an information alleging the unlawful taking of a “cow,” despite proof of the unlawful taking of a bull calf); State v. White, 214 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968) (holding that a possible 150-yard variance between site of traffic misdemeanors as alleged and site (on the same street) as proven was not material); Bradley v. State, 206 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968) (holding that, where defenda…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw