MABEL BERRY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 1977-04-29
No. 76-1493
MAGER, C. J., and ALDERMAN and LETTS, JJ., concur.
345 So. 2d 828 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1977) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 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.


Holding

The court held that failing to instruct the jury that intent to defraud is an indispensable element of obtaining property for a worthless check constitutes fundamental error.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant was convicted of violating Section 832.05(3), Florida Statutes (1975), based on a jury instruction that did not include the element of inten…

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
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of violation of Section 832.05(3), Florida Statutes (1975). The trial court instructed the jury in accordance with the Florida Standard Jury Instructions In Criminal Cases, using the appropriate instruction for violation of Section 832.05(3). The only issue is whether the trial court committed fundamental error, in view of the defense of good faith, by failing to also charge the jury that intent to defraud is an indispensable element of the crime of obtaining property in return for a worthless check.

This court has previously held that failure to give this additional instruction is fundamental error, the gravity of which requires reversal. Prince v. State, 333 So. 2d 63 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976). On the authority of oúr holding in Prince, we reverse appellant’s conviction and remand this case for a new trial.

. Because of the conflict which exists between our holding and the Florida Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases we hereby certify to the Supreme Court as a matter of great public interest the following questions:

1. Is the Florida Standard Jury Instruction entitled “Worthless Check — Obtaining Property F.S. 832.05(3)”, set forth on pages 203 and 204 of the Second Edition, defective because it fails to instruct the jury that intent to defraud is an indispensable element of the crime of obtaining property in return for a worthless check?

2. In a prosecution for violation of Section 832.05(3), Florida Statutes (1975), where the trial court has instructed the jury in accordance with the Florida Standard Jury Instruction entitled “Worthless Check — Obtaining Property F.S. 832.05(3)”, as set forth on pages 203 and 204 of the Second Edition, is fundamental error committed when the trial court does not additionally instruct the jury that intent to defraud is an indispensable element of the crime of obtaining property in return for a worthless check?

REVERSED and REMANDED.

MAGER, C. J., and ALDERMAN and LETTS, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Isham W. Adams, Jr. v. State, 356 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)
    …the present statute omits reference to an intent to defraud but explicitly excepts innocent transactions of a certain character. Prince v. State, 333 So. 2d 63 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Bailer v. State, 337 So. 2d 415 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Berry v. State, 345 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). We believe, to the contrary, that the Supreme Court silently retracted the Anderson dictum in Ennis v. State, 95 So. 2d 20 (Fla.1957), cert. den., 355 U.S. 868, 78 S.Ct. 117, 2 L.Ed.2d 74 (1957) and held, as did State v. Yarboro…
    1 / 2
  • State v. Berry, 358 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 1978)
    …quashed and the case is remanded with the direction to reinstate the conviction. Prince v. State, 333 So. 2d 63 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976), is overruled. It is so ordered. OVERTON, C. J., and ADKINS, ENGLAND and SUNDBERG, JJ., concur. . Berry v. State, 345 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). . Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla.Const. . (3) Obtaining property in return for worthless checks, etc.; penalty. — (a) It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to obtain any services, goods, wares or other things of val…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw