Courtney S. Brown v. State of Florida , 243 So. 3d 1037 ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •           FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
    STATE OF FLORIDA
    _____________________________
    No. 1D16-3243
    _____________________________
    COURTNEY S. BROWN,
    Appellant,
    v.
    STATE OF FLORIDA,
    Appellee.
    _____________________________
    On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County.
    Angela C. Dempsey, Judge.
    April 17, 2018
    PER CURIAM.
    Courtney S. Brown (“Appellant”) appeals her convictions and
    sentences for attempted second-degree murder, shooting at or into
    a building, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, and
    throwing a deadly missile into a building. We affirm in all respects
    and write only to explain why the trial court properly denied
    Appellant’s motion for judgment of acquittal.
    Appellant, Richard Golden, and LaPorshia Patterson were
    charged with attempted first-degree murder (count I) and shooting
    at or into a building (count II). Appellant also was charged with
    possession of a firearm by a convicted felon (count III) and
    throwing a deadly missile into a building (count V).
    During the state’s case-in-chief, testimony was presented that
    LaPorshia Patterson was involved in a fistfight with Erica Kimble
    in the presence of Appellant and her boyfriend, Richard Golden.
    Later that evening, Golden picked up Appellant and drove her to
    a trailer. Ebony Walker, Kianna Powell, Erica Kimble, Paradise
    Kimble, Jermaine Walker, and Johnayshin Wade lived in the
    trailer and were asleep. Appellant got out of Golden’s car and
    repeatedly knocked on the door. When no one answered, Golden
    saw Appellant throw something through the trailer’s window.
    Ebony Walker and Kianna Powell woke up after a brick was
    thrown through the kitchen window. They went to the door and
    saw Appellant getting into the front passenger seat of Golden’s car.
    Appellant accused someone of hitting her at a nightclub and
    demanded that they come outside. When Walker responded that
    she did not know what Appellant was talking about, Appellant
    reached across Golden and started shooting repeatedly. Walker,
    Powell, and Golden identified Appellant as the shooter. After
    Appellant started shooting, a truck came around the corner, and
    Powell saw LaPorshia Patterson shooting from the truck. After
    the shooting, Walker read the following post on Patterson’s
    Facebook page: “Dese hoes feeln like dey bullet proof. Bang, bang
    in my Gotti voice.” Appellant responded, “Pow. Damn sho can
    show em better then I can tell em.”
    Officer Federico of the Tallahassee Police Department
    testified that he stopped a vehicle driven by Golden. Appellant
    was in the front passenger seat, and Courtney Barnes and
    Cortlandt Barnes were in the back seat. A video and audio
    recording was played of a conversation between Appellant and
    Golden in the back seat of Federico’s patrol car. Federico testified
    that he heard Golden tell Appellant that she had gunpowder on
    her hands and that Appellant responded, “That’s what I’m saying,
    like.” Afterwards, Golden told Federico that he was the shooter.
    At trial, Golden admitted initially telling the police that he had the
    gun, that he was the only person doing the shooting, and that
    Appellant had nothing to do with it, but claimed that he did this to
    give Appellant time to clean the gunpowder off her hands.
    After the state rested, defense counsel moved for a judgment
    of acquittal, which was denied by the trial court. During the
    2
    defense’s case, Courtney Barnes, Cortlandt Barnes, and Appellant
    testified that Richard Golden was the shooter and that Appellant
    was not involved in the shooting. After the defense rested, defense
    counsel renewed the motion for judgment of acquittal, which again
    was denied by the trial court. The jury returned a verdict finding
    Appellant guilty of the lesser included offense of attempted second-
    degree murder as to count I and guilty as charged as to counts II,
    III, and V with the specific finding that Appellant actually
    possessed and discharged a firearm. The trial court adjudicated
    Appellant guilty and sentenced her to concurrent prison terms of
    thirty years with a twenty-year mandatory minimum on count I
    and fifteen years on counts II, III, and V. This appeal followed.
    On a motion for judgment of acquittal, the trial court should
    not grant the motion unless the evidence, viewed in a light most
    favorable to the state, does not establish a prima facie case of guilt.
    Dupree v. State, 
    705 So. 2d 90
    , 93 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (en banc).
    Because a motion for judgment of acquittal raises an issue of law,
    the court’s ruling on the motion is reviewed under the de novo
    standard. Jones v. State, 
    790 So. 2d 1194
    , 1197 (Fla. 1st DCA
    2001) (en banc). Like the trial court, the appellate court must
    consider the evidence and all reasonable inferences from the
    evidence in a light most favorable to the state. 
    Id.
    In this case, Appellant claims that the trial court erred in
    denying her motion for judgment of acquittal. In doing so,
    Appellant asserts that (1) her convictions were based wholly on
    circumstantial evidence; (2) the evidence was insufficient to
    establish Appellant’s guilt because the witnesses told conflicting
    stories concerning who actually did the shooting; and (3) none of
    the witnesses, except Appellant, could testify as to Appellant’s
    intent. The state correctly responds that the evidence against
    Appellant was not wholly circumstantial because (1) three
    eyewitnesses, Ebony Walker, Kianna Powell, and Richard Golden,
    testified that they saw Appellant holding and firing a gun; and (2)
    one eyewitness, Richard Golden, testified that he saw Appellant
    throw the brick through the window of the trailer.
    Furthermore, the mere fact that there was conflicting witness
    testimony does not justify a judgment of acquittal because any
    conflicts in the evidence must be viewed in a light most favorable
    3
    to the state. See Nelson v. State, 
    753 So. 2d 648
    , 649 (Fla. 3d DCA
    2000) (“On review, the appellate court must view the conflicting
    evidence in a light most favorable to the state.”). Appellant is
    improperly asking this court to reweigh the evidence and assess
    the credibility of the witnesses. See State v. Konegen, 
    18 So. 3d 697
    , 700 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (“Where there is contradictory,
    conflicting testimony, ‘the weight of the evidence and the
    witnesses’ credibility are questions solely for the jury,’ and ‘the
    force of such conflicting testimony should not be determined on a
    motion for judgment of acquittal.’”).
    Finally, the state correctly responds that issues of intent are
    generally not resolved on a motion for judgment of acquittal. See
    Manuel v. State, 
    16 So. 3d 833
    , 835 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (“Because
    direct evidence of intent is rare, and intent is usually proven
    through inference, ‘a trial court should rarely, if ever, grant a
    motion for judgment of acquittal on the issue of intent.’”). Viewed
    in a light favorable to the state, Appellant’s actions of traveling to
    the victims’ trailer in the middle of the night following a prior
    dispute, throwing a brick through the window of the trailer when
    the occupants refused to come out, repeatedly firing a gun into the
    occupied trailer, and making incriminating comments on Facebook
    after the shooting were legally sufficient to establish that (1)
    Appellant intentionally committed an act that was imminently
    dangerous to another and demonstrated a depraved mind without
    regard for human life so as to support a conviction for attempted
    second-degree murder in violation of section 782.04(2), Florida
    Statutes; (2) Appellant wantonly or maliciously threw a deadly
    missile into a building in violation of section 790.19, Florida
    Statutes; and (3) Appellant wantonly or maliciously shot into a
    building in violation of section 790.19, Florida Statutes.
    Accordingly, the trial court properly denied Appellant’s motion for
    judgment of acquittal.
    AFFIRMED.
    JAY, WINSOR, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.
    4
    _____________________________
    Not final until disposition of any timely and
    authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
    9.331.
    _____________________________
    David J. Joffe, Joffe Law, P.A., Ft. Lauderdale, for Appellant.
    Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Virginia Harris, Assistant
    Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
    5
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-3243

Citation Numbers: 243 So. 3d 1037

Filed Date: 4/17/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2018