Pitts v. State, 710 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). · Go Syfert
Search
Pitts v. State, 710 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
17 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Amended April 16, 2015 State of Iowa v. Scott Robert Robinson (iowa, 2015-02-06)
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Amended April 16, 2015 State of Iowa v. Scott Robert Robinson
Iowa · 2015 · confidence medium
See, e.g., People v. Vines, 251 P.3d 943, 974 (Cal. 2011); Pitts v. State, 710 So. 2d 62, 62 (Fla. Dist.
cited Cited as authority (rule) State of Iowa v. Scott Robert Robinson
Iowa · 2015 · confidence medium
See, e.g., People v. Vines, 251 P.2d 943, 974 (Cal. 2011); Pitts v. State, 710 So. 2d 62, 62 (Fla. Dist.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Marti v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2000 · confidence medium
Id. at 62-63 (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Brown v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1999 · confidence medium
See State v. Gray, 654 So.2d 552, 553-54 (Fla.1995)(ruling that there is no crime of attempted felony *599 murder); Quesenberry v. State, 711 So.2d 1359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)("We ... leave to the supreme court the task of deciding whether its decision in [ State v. Gray ] eliminates the crime of attempted second degree murder"); Pitts v. State, 710 So.2d 62, 62-63 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)(holding that the crime is recognized and "requir[es] only general intent, not the specific intent to kill"); Watkins v. State, 705 So.2d 938, 940 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)(Cobb, J., concurring specially)(citing State v. Gra…
cited Cited as authority (rule) Olivera v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1998 · confidence medium
We reject that claim on the authority of Gentry v. State, 437 So.2d 1097 , 1099 (Fla.1983); Pitts v. State, 710 So.2d 62, 63 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); and Galdamez v. State, 713 So.2d 1128 , 23 Fla. L.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Gilyard v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1998 · confidence medium
See also Galdamez v. State, 713 So.2d 1128 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Quesenberry v. State, 711 So.2d 1359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998); Pitts v. State, 710 So.2d 62, 62-63 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); and Watkins v. State, 705 So.2d 938, 939 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998).
Charles J. PITTS, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
97-590.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Mar 25, 1998.
710 So. 2d 62
Cope, Goderich and Fletcher.
Cited by 15 opinions  |  Published

Ivy Ginsberg Shanock, Miami, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Doquyen T. Nguyen, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before COPE, GODERICH and FLETCHER, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Charles J. Pitts appeals his convictions for armed robbery, armed kidnapping and attempted second degree murder.

First, the evidence was sufficient to convict defendant-appellant Pitts on the charge of kidnapping where the defendant and codefendant locked the two convenience store clerks in a back room prior to leaving the store after the robbery. See Berry v. State, 668 So.2d 967, 969 (Fla.1996).

Second, we conclude that the evidence was sufficient to convict defendant of attempted second degree murder, where defendant shot the unarmed convenience store clerk in the leg after the clerk told defendant that the safe was on a timer and would require ten minutes to open. See Brown v. State, 569 So.2d 1320, 1321 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); see also Gentry v. State, 437 So.2d 1097, 1099 (Fla.1983).

Third, defendant argues that under the logic of State v. Gray, 654 So.2d 552 (Fla. 1995), there should be no such crime as attempted second degree murder where the defendant has committed the completed act of shooting the victim in the leg. Defendant argues that the logic of Gray should be applied so as to hold that there can be no crime of attempted second degree murder under these circumstances. Since Gray was confined, by its terms, to the offense of attempted first degree felony murder, and since the[*63] Florida Supreme Court has expressly recognized the existence of the crime of attempted second degree murder and further, has held that the crime is one requiring only general intent, not the specific intent to kill, see Gentry, 437 So.2d at 1099, we reject defendant's argument on this point. See generally Watkins v. State, No. 96-3129, 705 So.2d 938 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998).

There is no merit to the claim of involuntary confession.

Affirmed.