From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gaines v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Feb 27, 2004
869 So. 2d 603 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

Summary

holding that drill covered in bandana was not "weapon" because there was no evidence defendant threatened to shoot or harm victim with it

Summary of this case from Browne v. State

Opinion

Case No. 1D02-3992.

Opinion filed February 27, 2004.

An appeal from an order from the circuit court for Leon County, Charles A. Francis, Judge.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Kathleen Stover, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, Attorneys for Appellant.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, and Felicia A. Wilcox, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, Attorneys for Appellee.


Appellant challenges his convictions and sentences for two counts of kidnapping and one count of robbery with a weapon. We affirm Appellant's convictions for kidnapping without discussion.

However, regarding Appellant's conviction for robbery with a weapon, the State failed to prove that the drill, which was covered with a bandana, was used as a weapon in a manner likely to cause death or great bodily harm. The record contains no evidence that Appellant made any threatening motion toward the victims with the drill and never verbally threatened to shoot or harm them. Appellant also never threatened to use the drill as a bludgeon or other type of weapon. See Prosser v. State, 742 So.2d 400 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (reversing conviction for armed robbery where there was no evidence that defendant used shrouded object in threatening manner or used object as a bludgeon); Butler v. State, 602 So.2d at 1306 (reversing conviction for armed robbery where defendant never used object as a bludgeon or threatened to use the object as a gun); see also Bates v. State, 561 So.2d 1341 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (reversing conviction for robbery with a deadly weapon where defendant carried a "nut driver" underneath a rag and did not use or threaten to use the object in a violent way).

Because the evidence was legally insufficient to establish that Appellant carried a "weapon" during the robbery, we reverse his conviction for robbery with a weapon and remand for entry of a judgment of unarmed robbery pursuant to section 812.13(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2001), and to resentence Appellant in accordance with that judgment.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED with directions.

BOOTH, VAN NORTWICK and LEWIS, JJ., CONCUR.


Summaries of

Gaines v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Feb 27, 2004
869 So. 2d 603 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

holding that drill covered in bandana was not "weapon" because there was no evidence defendant threatened to shoot or harm victim with it

Summary of this case from Browne v. State

reversing and remanding for entry of judgment of unarmed robbery and for re-sentencing, because evidence that defendant carried drill covered with bandana during robbery was insufficient to establish that defendant carried weapon in manner likely to cause death or great bodily harm during robbery, where defendant made no threatening motion with drill toward victims, never orally threatened to shoot or harm victims, and never threatened to use drill as bludgeon or other type of weapon

Summary of this case from Holley v. State
Case details for

Gaines v. State

Case Details

Full title:TERRY A. GAINES, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Feb 27, 2004

Citations

869 So. 2d 603 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

Citing Cases

Holley v. State

Because the State presented no evidence that the object was used, or threatened to be used, as a weapon, the…

Gaines v. State

July 20, 2004. Appeal from the 1st DCA 869 So.2d 603. Decision without published opinion. Rev.…