Freeman v. State, 743 So. 2d 603 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). · Go Syfert
Search
Freeman v. State, 743 So. 2d 603 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
4 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Ruiz v. State (fladistctapp, 2009-12-02)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ruiz v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2009 · confidence medium
Id. at 926 (holding that because both burglary and trespass rely on the definition of “structure” found in section 810.011(1), there is no basis to limit Hamilton to burglary cases); see also B.W. v. State, 973 So.2d 657, 658 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); Freeman v. State, 743 So.2d 603, 603 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).
cited Cited "see" B.W. v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See Freeman v. State, 743 So.2d 603 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); L.K.B. v. State, 677 So.2d 925 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996).
cited Cited "see" BW v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See Freeman v. State, 743 So.2d 603 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); L.K.B. v. State, 677 So.2d 925 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Curtis FREEMAN, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
98-4040.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Oct 13, 1999.
743 So. 2d 603
Per Curiam.
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Louis G. Carres, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Sarah B. Mayer, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Curtis Freeman, the appellant, was convicted, following a jury trial, of possession of cocaine (count I) and trespass in a structure or conveyance (count II). On appeal, Freeman contends, and the State concedes, that the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal with respect to the trespass charge.

In the instant case, it was undisputed that Freeman and others were standing in front of an abandoned apartment building. Thus, Freeman's conduct can be characterized as trespass in a structure or conveyance only if the area surrounding the building is considered "curtilage." See §§ 810.011(1), 810.08(1), Fla. Stat. (1997). The Florida Supreme Court has held, in the context of the burglary statute, that in order for an area surrounding a residence to be curtilage, "some form of an enclosure" is required. State v. Hamilton, 660 So.2d 1038, 1044 (Fla.1995). This enclosure requirement has since been extended to the trespass statute. See L.K.B. v. State, 677 So.2d 925 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). Here, the State failed to present evidence that the area in front of the abandoned apartment building was enclosed in any manner.

Accordingly, we reverse Freeman's conviction for violation of section 810.08(1), trespass in a structure or conveyance. We note, however, that contrary to the suggestions contained in the initial brief, our reversal of Freeman's conviction does not equate to a finding that his arrest (and the subsequent search) was unlawful.

WARNER, C.J., STONE and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.