ULYSSES ULICE GILBERT, PETITIONER,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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 well-founded fear of imminent peril is an element of aggravated assault.
Petitioner was convicted of aggravated assault and his conviction was affirmed by the District Court of Appeal. The appellate court relied on prior ca…
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 Conflict Of Decisions cases and more on FLexlaw
ADKINS, Acting Chief Justice.
By petition for certiorari, we have for review a decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District (Gilbert v. State, 329 So. 2d 339) which allegedly conflicts with a decision of this Court (State v. White, 324 So. 2d 630) on the same point of law. Article V, Section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution.
Petitioner was found guilty of aggravated assault. Upon appeal, his conviction was affirmed on the authority of Battle v. State, 292 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974); Nelson v. State, 157 So. 2d 96 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963); and McCullers v. State, 206 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968). These cases all stand for the rule of law, that a well-founded fear of violence or imminent peril on the part of the victim is not an element of the statutory offense of aggravated assault. In State v. White, supra, this Court held that the victim’s well-founded fear that violence is imminent is an element of the statutory offense of aggravated assault, and disapproved the holdings to the contrary in Battle v. State, supra, McCullers v. State, supra, and Nelson v. State, supra. We have jurisdiction.
The decision of the District Court is quashed and the cause is remanded to that court for further consideration in light of State v. White, supra.
It is so ordered.
BOYD, ENGLAND, SUNDBERG and HATCHETT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ulysses Ulice Gilbert v. State, 347 So. 2d 1087 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)…NATHAN, Judge. As mandated by the Florida Supreme Court in Gilbert v. State, 344 So. 2d 564 (Fla.1977), this cause is before us for further consideration in light of State v. White, 324 So. 2d 630 (Fla.1975). We have reviewed the case again, taking into consideration the supplemental briefs filed by counsel for the defense and for the Stat…
-
S.P.M. v. State, 66 So. 3d 317 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)…UCTION OF THE REASONABLE PERSON STANDARD Case law has instituted the use of a reasonable person standard to satisfy the element of a well-founded fear when the victim does not testify regarding his or her subjective state of mind. Gilbert v. State, 344 So. 2d 564 (Fla.1977) (Gilbert I), appears to be the progenitor of this practice. In less than 250 words, the supreme court did no more than quash a Third District decision because the district court had utilized cases which held that a well-founded fear of vi…
Authorities Cited
- State v. White, 324 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 1975)
- Paulet v. Hickey, 206 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968)
- Nelson v. State, 157 So. 2d 96 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)
- Goff v. Gen. Motors Corp., 292 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974)
- Battle v. State, 292 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974)
- Ulysses Ulice Gilbert v. State, 329 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)
- Ira MacKler v. World Wide Meats, Inc., 329 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)