From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mitchell v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
Dec 18, 1997
703 So. 2d 1062 (Fla. 1997)

Opinion

No. 91,107

December 18, 1997

Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal — Certified Great Public Importance Second District — Case No. 95-02169 (Pinellas County).

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender and Carol J. Y. Wilson, Assistant Public Defender, Tenth Judicial Circuit, Clearwater, Florida, for Petitioner.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General; Robert J. Krauss, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Chief of Criminal Law and Wendy Buffington, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, Florida, for Respondent.


We have for review Mitchell v. State, 698 So.2d 555, 557 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997), wherein the district court certified:

If the State fails to prove that a BB pistol is loaded and operable at the time of an offense, can it be classified as a dangerous or deadly weapon when the defendant's actions cause the victim to reasonably believe that the BB pistol is loaded and operable?

We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We recently addressed this issue in Dale v. State, 22 Fla. L. Weekly S670 (Fla. Oct. 23, 1997), wherein we held that whether a BB gun — loaded or unloaded — is a deadly weapon is a jury question. We approve Mitchell.

It is so ordered.

KOGAN, C.J., and HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., and GRIMES, Senior Justice, concur.

OVERTON, J., "I dissent for the reasons expressed in my dissent inDale v. State, No. 87,691 (Fla. Oct. 23, 1997)."


Summaries of

Mitchell v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
Dec 18, 1997
703 So. 2d 1062 (Fla. 1997)
Case details for

Mitchell v. State

Case Details

Full title:DEXTER MITCHELL, PETITIONER, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT

Court:Supreme Court of Florida

Date published: Dec 18, 1997

Citations

703 So. 2d 1062 (Fla. 1997)

Citing Cases

Vega v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corrs.

The Florida Supreme Court "approve[d]" the Mitchell decision because "whether a BB gun-loaded or unloaded-is…

Swanson v. State

PER CURIAM.The appellant's conviction for armed robbery with a deadly weapon is affirmed, in accordance with…