What’s the Difference Between Theft and Burglary in Florida? 

Pursuant to Florida law, burglary is the act of entering a building with the intent to commit a criminal act inside, unless the property is open to the public or the defendant was invited or is licensed to enter. Notwithstanding entrants that are invited or licensed, it also constitutes burglary to secretly remain in a building or stay after permission to remain has been withdrawn, with the intent to commit a crime, or to stay to commit or attempt to commit a forcible felony. While burglary may involve theft, stealing property is not a statutory element of the offense.

A person that knowingly uses or obtains, or attempts to use or obtain someone else’s property with the intent to deprive the person of his or her property rights or benefits, or appropriate the property for his or her own use, commits theft. Such acts constitute theft regardless of whether the offender intends to temporarily or permanently take the property.

Classification of Theft and Burglary Offenses

Burglary is a felony of the first degree, punishable by up to life imprisonment, if during the course of committing the crime the defendant commits an assault and battery, is or becomes armed with a dangerous weapon or explosives, or uses a vehicle to assist in committing the offense and causes property damage to the building that exceeds $1,000.

In cases in which the offender does not commit an assault and battery and is not armed with a dangerous weapon or explosive, burglary may be a felony of the second or third-degree, depending on the type of building the defendant enters and whether anyone else was inside the property at the time the offense was committed. Penalties for felonies of the second degree can include up to fifteen years imprisonment and fines, while penalties for felonies of the third degree may be up to five years imprisonment and fines.

Many theft crimes are felonies of the first degree. For example, if the stolen property is worth more than $100,000, is a semitrailer that was used by a law enforcement officer, is cargo worth more than $50,000 that has entered the stream of commerce, theft is a felony of the first degree. Theft will also be charged as a felony of the first degree if the offender commits a grand theft and uses a vehicle to assist in committing the offense and causes damage to a building that exceeds $1,000. Most other theft crimes are charged as felonies of the second degree.

Meet with a Knowledgeable Clearwater Criminal Defense Attorney

Burglary and theft are both offenses that can lead to significant penalties, including jail time. If you are accused of theft or any other crime, it is in your best interest to meet with an attorney as soon as possible to discuss your options. William Hanlon of Hanlon Law is a knowledgeable Clearwater criminal defense attorney who can develop a compelling case designed to provide you with a strong chance of a favorable outcome. You can contact Mr. Hanlon via the form online or by calling 727-897-5413 to set up a meeting.

The post What’s the Difference Between Theft and Burglary in Florida?  appeared first on Clearwater Criminal Lawyer Blog.

This was illustrated in a case recently decided by a Florida court of appeals, in which the court overruled a defendant’s dual burglary convictions due to double jeopardy, despite the fact that the crimes the defendant was charged with did not violate double jeopardy. If you are a resident of Clearwater facing criminal charges, it is prudent to meet with a skilled Clearwater criminal defense attorney to discuss your available defenses.

The Defendant’s Charges and Convictions

Reportedly, the defendant entered the home of his victim without her consent. When the victim discovered the defendant, he pinned her against a wall and then fled. The defendant was later identified by the victim in a lineup. The defendant was charged with armed burglary, burglary with a battery and robbery with a deadly weapon. During the trial, the defendant argued that the dual burglary charges violated double jeopardy and asked the court to dismiss the second charge. The court declined the defendant’s request. A jury convicted the defendant of burglary, the lesser included offense of the armed burglary charge. He was convicted of burglary with battery and robbery with a deadly weapon as well. Following his sentencing, the defendant appealed.

Double Jeopardy Under Florida Law

The court noted the defendant was charged with two burglaries, one charge alleging battery and the other the use of deadly weapon. While the defendant was not convicted of burglary with a deadly weapon he was convicted of the lesser included offense, which violated double jeopardy. The State argued that the dual convictions were permitted by section 775.021 of the Florida Statutes, which allows for convictions for each offense committed during a single criminal act unless the offenses required the same elements of proof, were degrees of the same offense, or were lesser included offenses.

The court held that while the crimes with which the defendant was charged did not violate double jeopardy, the crimes for which the defendant was actually convicted violated double jeopardy. Specifically, the court noted that burglary is a lesser included offense of burglary with a battery. As such, the court found that the defendant was improperly convicted of both counts. The court ordered one conviction and the defendant’s sentence to be vacated and remanded the case for resentencing.

Meet with an Experienced Clearwater Criminal Defense Attorney

Criminal defendants have certain rights under the law that the State is not permitted to disregard. If you live in Clearwater and are charged with a crime, it is important to retain an experienced Clearwater criminal defense attorney who will fight to help you retain your liberties. William Hanlon of Hanlon Law is a trusted Clearwater criminal defense attorney who can provide you with a thorough and vigorous defense. Mr. Hanlon can be contacted at 727-897-5413 or via the online form to set up a meeting.

More Blog Posts:

Confidential Informant Tape Leads to Florida Burglary Conviction, April 13, 2018, Clearwater and St. Petersburg Criminal Lawyer Blog

The post Florida Court Vacates Dual Burglary Convictions Due to Double Jeopardy Violation appeared first on Clearwater Criminal Lawyer Blog.

In a recent case arising in a Florida Court of Appeals, the court explained when an instruction on the independent act doctrine is appropriate.  If you live in Clearwater and are facing criminal charges, you should consult an experienced Clearwater criminal defense attorney to discuss your case and what defenses you may be able to set forth.

 Trial Testimony

Reportedly, the defendant was charged with first-degree felony murder and armed burglary. During the trial, the state presented evidence the defendant and three other individuals went to the victim’s apartment, with the intent to rob the victim. While he was in the victim’s apartment, the defendant took the victim into a room and threatened to kill the victim’s fiancé if the victim did not tell the defendant where drugs where hidden. Additionally, the defendant hit the victim in the head with a gun. The defendant subsequently told the victim’s fiancé he was going to kidnap the victim for ransom. The victim was forced into the trunk of his car which was driven from the scene by one of the defendant’s co-conspirators. The victim subsequently escaped from the trunk and was shot and killed by one of the defendant’s co-conspirators.

Allegedly, the defendant’s attorney requested the jury receive an instruction on the independent act doctrine, but the court denied his request. The defendant was convicted of the crimes with which he was charged and sentenced to concurrent life sentences. He subsequently appealed his conviction, arguing the court abused its discretion in rejecting his request for a jury instruction on the independent act doctrine.

The Independent Act Doctrine

On appeal, the court explained that the independent act doctrine is relevant when one co-felon who engaged in a common plan does not partake in acts committed by his or her co-felon that fall outside of the originally agreed upon plan. The court held that a jury instruction on the independent act doctrine is only called for when the actions of the co-felon that fall outside of the original plan are not predictable based on the actions taken by the co-conspirators. Thus, in cases where a defendant partakes in a felony and a victim is subsequently murdered during the act, an independent act instruction is not appropriate. The court was not persuaded by the defendant’s argument that an independent act instruction was warranted because they only agreed to rob and kidnap the victim, finding that the victim’s murder was foreseeable under the facts surrounding the kidnapping. As such, the court affirmed the defendant’s conviction.

Meet with an Experienced Clearwater Criminal Defense Attorney

If you are a Clearwater resident charged with a crime, you should meet with an experienced criminal defense attorney who can assess the facts of your case and assist you in formulating a defense.  William Hanlon of Hanlon Law is a knowledgeable Clearwater criminal defense attorney who will work diligently to help you seek a favorable result under the circumstances of your case. Call our offices at 727-897-5413 or contact us through the online form to schedule a meeting.

More Blog Posts:

Florida Court of Appeals Affirms Eyewitness Testimony is Sufficient Evidence to Support a Conviction for a Crime November 26, 2018, Clearwater and St. Petersburg Criminal Lawyer Blog

Murder Conviction Upheld by Florida Appeals Court September 25, 2018, Clearwater and St. Petersburg Criminal Lawyer Blog

Florida Tax Fraudster’s Plea Deal Means 30 Months in Prison December 11, 2017, Clearwater and St. Petersburg Criminal Lawyer Blog

The post Florida Court Explains Independent Act Doctrine appeared first on Clearwater Criminal Lawyer Blog.

Police apprehended the defendant later the same day. He told the cops that the defendant and he had planned to go to the RV park to steal the victim’s Segway. He claimed he didn’t know that the other man had a gun until he took out the weapon and told the defendant they were going to take the jewelry. A police informant who first met the two men in jail approached the cops with information about the crime and later agreed to tape a conversation with the defendant. That conversation – which took place while both men were in a car, using drugs – was later played for the jury. In it, the defendant described participating in the burglary, according to the court. He was convicted, classified as a habitual offender, and sentenced to life in prison.

Affirming the decision on appeal, the Fourth District said the trial court properly allowed the defendant’s taped conversation with the confidential informant to be introduced as evidence. The court rejected his claim that the use of the tape violated his constitutional right to an attorney because the cops didn’t tell him that he had the right to a lawyer before the informant taped the conversation. Although statements made to an informant in jail may be covered by the right to counsel, the court noted that the defendant “was not in custody nor had he even been arrested for the charges when he confessed.”

The post Confidential Informant Tape Leads to Florida Burglary Conviction appeared first on Clearwater Criminal Lawyer Blog.