NORMAN NEWKIRK, 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 a defendant cannot be convicted of accessory after the fact when charged only with robbery, as it is a separate offense and not a lesser included offense.
Appellant was charged with robbery but convicted of accessory after the fact. The appellate court reviewed the propriety of this conviction.…
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 Accessory After The Fact cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant was charged by an information with the crime of robbery, under § 813.011 Fla.Stat., F.S.A. On trial before the court he was adjudged guilty of the offense prescribed in § 776.03 Fla.Stat., F.S.A., of accessory after the fact, from which he has taken this appeal.
The appellant argues, and the state concedes, that Brown v. State, Fla.1968, 206 So.2d 377, and Douglas v. State, Fla.App.1968, 214 So.2d 653, show it was not proper to adjudge the defendant guilty of accessory after the fact in this case. That crime is a separate offense, and not a lesser included offense of robbery. The information did not allege facts constituting that separate offense.
We reject the request of the state that a new trial be ordered in this cause on the crime of accessory after the fact, because, as we have stated above, that crime is separate from robbery and was not' included in the information. Our ruling in this case does not operate to absolve the appellant of the crime of accessory after the fact with reference to this transaction, and is without prejudice to the state to institute further proceedings relating to that offense, as it may be advised.
Accordingly, the judgment entered in this cause, of guilt of the crime of accessory after the fact, is reversed with direction to the trial court to discharge the defendant of the alleged offense of robbery, of which he was not found guilty.
Reversed with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Palmes v. State, 397 So. 2d 648 (Fla. 1981)…mmitted a crime other than the one he is charged with is not a legal defense requiring a jury instruction. Furthermore, the crime of accessory after the fact is not a lesser included offense of the crime of premeditated murder. Cf. Newkirk v. State, 222 So. 2d 435 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969) (accessory after the fact is a separate offense, not a lesser included offense of robbery). Therefore, the defendant was not entitled to an instruction on accessory after the fact as a lesser included offense. See State v. Anderso…1 / 2
-
Staten v. State, 519 So. 2d 622 (Fla. 1988)…t of authority in other states. Initially, we note that double jeopardy is not implicated here. See Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932); Morman v. State, 458 So. 2d 88 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Newkirk v. State, 222 So. 2d 435 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969). Nor does this case concern whether the legislature intended separate punishments for a single act that technically is proscribed by more than one statute. See Carawan v. State, 515 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1987). Our decision in this ca…
-
A. Y. G. v. State, 414 So. 2d 1158 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…2d 653 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968). Although A. Y. G.’s flight from the police may have been strong evidence that she was an accessory after the fact, she cannot be convicted as an accessory after the fact where that crime was not charged. Newkirk v. State, 222 So. 2d 435 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969); Douglas v. State, supra. This case graphically demonstrates the desirability and the necessity in this type of situation for the State Attorney to charge the defendant not only as a principal under Section 777.011, Florida Statu…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Brown v. State, 206 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 1968)
- Ira Douglas v. State, 214 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)