Scott Ammons v. State of Florida , 253 So. 3d 130 ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •          FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
    STATE OF FLORIDA
    _____________________________
    No. 1D16-2084
    _____________________________
    SCOTT AMMONS,
    Appellant,
    v.
    STATE OF FLORIDA,
    Appellee.
    _____________________________
    On appeal from the Circuit Court for Baker County.
    James M. Colaw, Judge.
    August 16, 2018
    B.L. THOMAS, C.J.
    Appellant was charged as a principal for trafficking in
    methamphetamine under sections 777.011 and 893.135, Florida
    Statutes. To sustain his conviction as a principal, the State was
    required to establish that Appellant “intend[ed] that the crime be
    committed and do some act to assist the other person in actually
    committing the crime.” Staten v. State, 
    519 So. 2d 622
    , 624 (Fla.
    1988) (emphasis added); Evans v. State, 
    643 So. 2d 1204
    , 1205-06
    (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (“To secure a conviction on an aider and
    abettor theory, the state must establish (1) that the defendant
    helped the person who actually committed the crime by doing or
    saying something that caused, encouraged, incited or otherwise
    assisted that person to commit the crime; and (2) that the
    defendant intended to participate in the crime.”) (emphasis
    added)). We review the evidence in a light most favorable to the
    State, including construing all inferences in favor of the State.
    Lynch v. State, 
    293 So. 2d 44
     (Fla. 1974).
    There was legally sufficient evidence to submit to the jury
    that Appellant “intended to participate in the crime,” Evans, 
    643 So. 2d at 1206
    , including Appellant’s post-arrest admission that
    he and the other suspects should not have completed the drug
    transaction. But there was not sufficient evidence that Appellant
    did some act to assist in the commission of the crime. Theophile
    v. State, 
    78 So. 3d 574
    , 577 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). Thus, under our
    de novo review of the trial court’s ruling denying Appellant’s
    motion for judgment of acquittal, Jones v. State, 
    790 So. 2d 1194
    ,
    1196 (Fla. 2001) (en banc), we reverse Appellant’s conviction as a
    principal under section 777.011, Florida Statutes. Based on our
    decision, we need not address the other issues raised by
    Appellant.
    REVERSED and REMANDED with directions to discharge
    Appellant.
    LEWIS and MAKAR, JJ., concur.
    _____________________________
    Not final until disposition of any timely and
    authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
    9.331.
    _____________________________
    Andy Thomas, Public Defender, Danielle Jorden, Assistant Public
    Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
    Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Robert Quentin Humphrey,
    Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-2084

Citation Numbers: 253 So. 3d 130

Filed Date: 8/16/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 8/16/2018