State v. Clark

5 Citing cases

  1. State v. Clark

    442 So. 2d 209 (Fla. 1983)

    BOYD, Justice. This case is before us on petition for review of State v. Clark, 416 So.2d 13 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Our jurisdiction was invoked and the case accepted for review on the ground of express and direct conflict of decisions.

  2. Brown v. State

    436 So. 2d 1113 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

    Id., at 542. The Rozier analysis was expressly adopted by this court in Barnes v. State, 426 So.2d 1274 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983), State v. Clark, 416 So.2d 13 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), and State v. Speights, 417 So.2d 1168 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Citing these cases for the proposition that proof of a stealthy non-consensual entry is not prima facie evidence of the crime of burglary, appellant contends that it was reversible error for the trial court to deny his motion to dismiss. Because of the recent case of State v. Waters, 436 So.2d 66 (Fla. 1983), we disagree.

  3. Barnes v. State

    426 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)   Cited 2 times

    The court took the Waters view and proceeded to trial. Subsequently, this Court adopted the Rozier view, State v. Speights, 417 So.2d 1168 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); State v. Clark, 416 So.2d 13 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Consequently, we reverse the burglary conviction and remand for an adjudication of guilt on the only crime actually charged in this count of the information, trespass.

  4. State v. Speights

    417 So. 2d 1168 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)   Cited 5 times

    Another panel of this Court has recently concluded that the State must reduce to a specific offense the nature of the offense charged as a part of a burglary information. State v. Clark, 416 So.2d 13 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). We adopt this view.

  5. Brown v. State

    417 So. 2d 280 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

    Since ยง 810.07, Fla. Stat., relied upon by the state in drafting the instant information, creates only a prima facie case of intent to commit an offense generally, the instant information was defective. See State v. Clark, 416 So.2d 13 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Rozier v. State, 402 So.2d 539 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). Although defective, the information did charge defendant with the unlawful entry of the victim's home with the intent to commit an unspecified offense therein. By not objecting to the state's failure to allege the particular crime intended to be committed by way of a timely motion to dismiss, defendant waived the defect.