COLONIAL STORES, INC., A FOREIGN CORPORATION, DOING BUSINESS AS BIG STAR FOOD STORES AND CLYDE D. CARTER, APPELLANTS,
v.
DOYLE WAYNE SCARBROUGH, 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.
Colonial Stores and Clyde Carter appealed a judgment for malicious prosecution and false imprisonment. The court affirmed the judgment, rejecting appellants' argument that a prosecutor's charging decision carries a conclusive presumption of probable cause, and finding sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict for malicious prosecution.
A prosecutor's decision to prosecute does not carry a conclusive presumption of probable cause. The trial court erred in instructing the jury that filing of an information gave rise to a presumption of probable cause, though this error did not warrant reversal because sufficient evidence of malicious prosecution supported the verdict regardless.
[1] A prosecutor's decision to prosecute does not give rise to a conclusive presumption of probable cause in a malicious prosecution action.
[2] A general verdict will be upheld if any reasonable view of the evidence, read in a light favorable to the plaintiff, sustains any of the pleaded causes of action.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“For the reasons stated in Rodgers v. W. T. Grant Co., 326 So. 2d 57, 65 (Fla.App. 1st, 1976), cert. pending, we decline to accord the Gallucci presumption to a prosecutor's decision.”
The court's holding that a prosecutor's charging decision does not carry a conclusive presumption of probable cause
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellee Doyle Wayne Scarbrough was prosecuted for a robbery. The State Attorney filed an information against Scarbrough. A trial occurred where evide…
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 Declaration Against Penal Interest cases and more on FLexlaw
SMITH, Judge.
We have thoroughly considered the entire record, the briefs and the oral argument on this appeal from a money judgment entered on a general verdict for plaintiff in an action for malicious prosecution and false imprisonment.
Appellants’ only argument attacking the sufficiency of evidence on the malicious prosecution count is that the trial court failed to give proper effect, when ruling on appellants’ motions for directed verdict, to the presumption of probable cause which is said to have arisen from the State Attorney’s decision to prosecute. Gallucci v. Milavic, 100 So. 2d 375 (Fla.1958), held that such a presumption arises from a magistrate’s finding of probable cause and that it is conclusive, absent fraud or other corrupt means employed by the person initiating the prosecution. For the reasons stated in Rodgers v.
W. T. Grant Co., 326 So. 2d 57, 65 (Fla.App. 1st, 1976), cert. pending, we decline to accord the Gallucci presumption to a prosecutor’s decision. We do not construe Meade v. Super Test Sales, Inc., 306 So. 2d 211 (Fla.App. 2d 1975), as supporting appellants’ position. Rather, that decision found that “there was reasonable cause presented” for the State Attorney’s decision to prosecute. 306 So. 2d at 212. Similarly, Ward v. Allen, 152 Fla. 82, 11 So. 2d 193 (1943), held that the filing of an information is evidence tending to show grounds for prosecution, but it did not give such evidence presumptive effect.
Here, the trial court charged the jury that filing of an information against appellee gave rise to a presumption of probable cause. The charge was favorable to appellants in this respect, and we agree with appellee that the instruction was in error. In accordance with Rule 1.110(g), R.C.P., appellee pleaded alternatively or cumulatively both false imprisonment and malicious prosecution.
The jury was separately charged concerning these distinct torts and it returned a general verdict. Our duty, of course, is to uphold the verdict if any reasonable view of the evidence, read in a light favorable to plaintiff, would sustain it. Because the judgment may thus be sustained as one based on sufficient evidence of malicious prosecution, concerning which appellants’ only attack has failed, we need not decide whether the judgment is sustainable also under the alternative or cumulative theory of false imprisonment.
The declaration of the actual robber concerning his crime was against his penal interests and was properly admitted. Baker v. State, 336 So. 2d 364 (Fla.1976). Taken as a whole, the instructions did not omit essential elements and were not misleading. Appellants have not demonstrated, by testimony or otherwise, prejudice resulting from their inability to discover all contents of the State Attorney’s file. None of the other asserted errors warrant reversal.
AFFIRMED.
MILLS, Acting C. J., and MELVIN, WOODROW, Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Colonial Stores, Inc. v. Doyle Wayne Scarbrough, 355 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 1977)…[*1183] SUNDBERG, Justice. This cause is before us on petition for writ of certiorari to review the decision of the District Court of Appeal, First District, reported at 338 So. 2d 1119, which is alleged to be in conflict with McKinney v. Dade County, 341 So. 2d 1061 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), on the issue of whether the filing of an information by the state attorney in a criminal prosecution raises, in a subsequent malicious prosecution…
-
Saudi Arabian Airlines Corp. v. Dunn, 438 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…evidence to justify a finding by the jury that Al-Faqeer was a Saudi employee, we find it unnecessary to consider appellant’s argument that there was insufficient evidence to support a verdict based on “agency.” Colonial Stores, Inc. v. Scarborough, 338 So. 2d 1119 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976), aff’d. 355 So. 2d 1181 (Fla.1977). . In deciding Dinkins, the court distinguished the decision of Makoske v. Lombardy, 47 A.D.2d 284, 366 N.Y.S.2d 475 (1975), aff’d. 39 N.Y.2d 773, 385 N.Y.S.2d 31, 350 N.E. 2d 408 (1976). In Ma…
-
Hinton Roy Johnson, Jr. v. Lasher Milling Co., Inc., 379 So. 2d 1048 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)…at case the plaintiff pleaded alternatively or cumulatively a cause of action for both false imprisonment and malicious prosecution. The jury returned a general verdict for the plaintiff. The District Court held (Colonial Stores, Inc. v. Scarbrough, 338 So. 2d 1119 (Fla.1st DCA 1976), affirmed by the Florida Supreme Court, Colonial Stores, Inc. v. Scarbrough, supra), that the general verdict could be upheld because the court found the evidence sufficient to sustain recovery under the count for malicious prosec…
Authorities Cited
- Al Gallucci v. Milavic, 100 So. 2d 375 (Fla. 1958)
- Baker v. State, 336 So. 2d 364 (Fla. 1976)
- Ward v. Allen, 152 Fla. 82 (Fla. 1942)
- L. Maxcy, Inc. v. MRS. Annie LEE Morris, 152 Fla. 82 (Fla. 1942)
- Meade v. Super Test Sales, Inc., 306 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)
- Rodgers v. W. T. Grant Co., 326 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)