Peart v. State
No. 4D21-3582 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Mar. 15, 2023)
Even if the state had presented evidence that the defendant had helped to clean up the car, such evidence, at best, would have shown the defendant would have been liable as an accessory after the fact, which is different from principal liability. See § 777.03(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2019) ("Any person who maintains or assists the principal or an accessory before the fact, or gives the offender any other aid, knowing that the offender had committed a crime and such crime was a capital, life, first degree, or second degree felony, or had been an accessory thereto before the fact, with the intent that the offender avoids or escapes detection, arrest, trial, or punishment, is an accessory after the fact.").
PAGE 16
Millstein v. Holtz
No. 21-CV-61179-RAR (S.D. Fla. Sep. 1, 2022)
Motion to dismiss
4 more...
Based on the above allegations, Plaintiff alleges nine counts on behalf of herself and the Investor Class: I. Violation of Fla. Stat. § 517.07(1); II. Violation of Fla. Stat. § 517.12(1); III. Violation of Fla. Stat. § 517.301; IV. Breach of Fiduciary Duty; V. Negligence; VI. Violation of Florida's Civil Remedies for Criminal Practices Act, Fla. Stat. §§ 772.103(1), (3)-(4), 772.104(1), 777.011, and 777.03(1)(a) (“Florida RICO”); VII. Conspiracy to Violate Florida RICO; VIII. Violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(a), (c)-(d) (“federal RICO”); and IX. Equitable Action for Appointment of Receiver, for Accounting and for Disgorgement of Ill-Gotten Gains, Unjust Enrichment, and Constructive Trust.
PAGE 5
Millstein v. Holtz
No. 21-CV-61179-RAR (S.D. Fla. Aug. 23, 2022) Cited 1 times
Motion to dismiss
5 more...
Based on the above allegations, Plaintiff alleges nine counts on behalf of herself and the Investor Class: I. Violation of Fla. Stat. § 517.07(1); II. Violation of Fla. Stat. § 517.12(1); III. Violation of Fla. Stat. § 517.301; IV. Breach of Fiduciary Duty; V. Negligence; VI. Violation of Florida's Civil Remedies for Criminal Practices Act, Fla. Stat. §§ 772.103(1), (3)-(4), 772.104(1), 777.011, and 777.03(1)(a) (“Florida RICO”); Count VII. Conspiracy to Violate Florida RICO; Count VIII. Violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(a), (c)-(d) (“federal RICO”); and Count IX. Equitable Action for Appointment of Receiver, for Accounting and for Disgorgement of Ill-Gotten Gains, Unjust Enrichment, and Constructive Trust.
PAGE 3
Cafe, Gelato & Panini LLC v. Simon Prop. Grp.
CASE NO. 20-60981-CIV-CANNON/Hunt (S.D. Fla. May. 21, 2021)
Motion to dismiss
8 more...
Based on these allegations, Plaintiffs assert the following seven causes of action: (1) Violation of Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), 18 U.S.C. § 1962(a), (c)-(d), against all Defendants (Count I); (2) Unjust Enrichment against Defendants Simon, Inc., Simon Partnership, and M.S. Management on behalf of all putative classes (Count II); (3) Violation of Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act ("FDUPTA"), Fla. Stat. § 501.201, et seq., against Defendants Simon, Inc., Simon Partnership, and M.S. Management on behalf of the Florida Statutory Class and the TCBR class (Count III); (4) Violation of Florida's Civil Remedies for Criminal Practices Act ("Florida Rico Act"), Fla. Stat. §§ 772.103(1), (3)-(4), 772.104(1), 777.011, and 777.03( 1)(a), against all Defendants on behalf of the Florida Statutory Class and the TCBR Class (Count IV); (5) Breach of Contract against the Defendant Trust on behalf of the TCBR Class (Count V); (6) Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing against the Trust and on behalf of the TCBR Class (Count VI); and (7) Breach of Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act ("DTPA"), Tex…
Branton v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr.
No. 17-14796 (11th Cir. Dec. 10, 2019)
This appeal arises out of Branton's Florida conviction for one count of robbery with a firearm as a principal, in violation of Fla. Stat. § 812.13, and three counts of acting as an accessory-after-the-fact, in violation of Fla. Stat. § 777.03. We adopt the underlying facts of the case as laid out in the district court's thorough order, see Doc. 14, and discuss them only to the extent that they are relevant to this appeal.
PAGE 3
Rice v. State
284 So. 3d 1130 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2019)
Finally, the sentence imposed by the trial court was lawful. The charge of accessory after the fact to first-degree murder is a first-degree felony punishable by up to thirty years' imprisonment. §§ 775.082(b), 777.03, Fla. Stat. (2016). Felony first-degree murder is a capital felony punishable by up to life imprisonment. §§ 775.082(1)(b) 2., 782.04(1)(a)2., Fla. Stat. (2016). The trial court legally imposed the statutory maximum for each offense.
PAGE 1134
In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases—Report 2018-02
No. SC18-513 (Fla. Oct. 25, 2018)
If the felony alleged is child abuse, neglect of a child, aggravated child abuse, aggravated manslaughter of a child under 18 years of age, or murder of a child under 18 years of age, the court may need to determine whether the defendant is a victim of domestic violence. See § 777.03(1)(b), Fla. Stat. If a court determines that the defendant was not a victim of domestic violence, it is unclear whether the courts will require a jury finding on that issue.
PAGE 20
In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases—Report 2018-02
256 So. 3d 1316 (Fla. 2018)
Define the felony alleged. If the felony alleged is child abuse, neglect of a child, aggravated child abuse, aggravated manslaughter of a child under 18 years of age, or murder of a child under 18 years of age, it is a defense if the court finds that the defendant was a victim of domestic violence. See § 777.03(1)(b), Fla. Stat.
PAGE 1332
In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases—Report 2018-02
No. SC18-513 (Fla. Oct. 25, 2018)
Define the felony alleged. If the felony alleged is child abuse , neglect of a child, aggravated child abuse, aggravated manslaughter of a child under 18 years of age, or murder of a child under 18 years of age, it is a defense if the court finds that the defendant was a victim of domestic violence. See § 777.03(1)(b), Fla. Stat.
PAGE 19
Truthinadvertisingenforcers.Com v. Dish Network, LLC
Case No. 8:16-cv-2366-T-33JSS (M.D. Fla. Dec. 14, 2016) Cited 1 times
Motion to dismiss
8 more...
Additionally, the Fourth Amended Complaint includes Counts 8-99 against the internet service provider Defendants, asserting negligence and negligence per se claims under both 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 and 3, and Fla. Stat. §§ 777.011 and 777.03. To the extent that each count is based on federal law, Truth cannot state a claim because the federal statutes are criminal aiding and abetting and accessory after the fact statutes that do not provide a private cause of action. See Cent. Bank of Denver, N.A. v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, N.A., 511 U.S. 164, 190-91 (1994)(finding no civil cause of action for violations of federal securities law exists under the aiding and abetting statute, § 2, and noting that the Court has been "quite reluctant to infer a private right of action from a criminal prohibition alone" and has refused to "infer a private right of action from 'a bare criminal statute.'"); Hilow v. Rome City Sch. Dist., No. 6:14-CV-288, 2015 WL 893050, at *8 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 2, 2015), appeal dismissed (May 18, 2015)(dismissing with prejudice civil claims brought under 18 U.S.C. § 3, regarding accessory after the fact liability, and 18 U.S.C. § 2, regarding liability for aiding…

Cases from cite.case.law:

IN RE STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES- REPORT, 256 So. 3d 1316 (Fla. 2018)

. . . Additionally, an italicized note referencing section 777.03(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2018), is relocated . . . This instruction was adopted in 2018. 3.5(c) 21.18 ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT § 777.03(1) Fla. Stat. . . . See § 777.03(1)(b), Fla. Stat. . . . See § 777.03(1)(b), Fla. Stat. . . .

J. CONNOLLY, Jr. v. STATE, 172 So. 3d 893 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Legislature eliminated such distinctions (except for accessory after the fact, which still exists, see § 777.03 . . .

STATE v. EDWARDS,, 146 So. 3d 87 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Edwards was charged with being an accessory after the fact, pursuant to section 777.03(c), Florida Statutes . . .

JONES, v. STATE, 120 So. 3d 135 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . See § 777.03, Fla. Stat. (2011) (setting forth the accessory after the fact offense). . . .

ENOCH, v. STATE, 95 So. 3d 344 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . . § 777.03(1). . . .

L. BRANTON, v. STATE, 86 So. 3d 560 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . Id. at 625 (citing § 777.03, Fla. Stat. (1985)). . . .

M. P. v. STATE, 66 So. 3d 1055 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . See §§ 777.03, 812.014, Fla. Stat. (2009). Mr. . . .

BAKER, Jr. v. STATE, 4 So. 3d 758 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . trial, for accessory after the fact to second-degree murder with a firearm, in violation of section 777.03 . . . In language that essentially tracks that found in section 777.03(1), Florida Statutes (2005), the information . . . parent or grandparent, child or grandchild, brother or sister, to the offender in violation of Section 777.03 . . . His argument is that, although the information essentially tracked section 777.03(1), it was fundamentally . . . IF, ALTHOUGH THE INDICTMENT OR INFORMATION ALLEGES THE ELEMENTS OF THE OFFENSE AS SET OUT IN SECTION 777.03 . . .

CASE, a v. ESLINGER, FL, a, 555 F.3d 1317 (11th Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 777.03. Case was held at the Seminole County jail for approximately ten hours. . . .

MINTER, a v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N. A., 593 F. Supp. 2d 788 (D. Md. 2009)

. . . In connection with the origination of their $185,625 mortgage loan, the Alboroughs paid $777.03 in settlement-related . . .

CANNON, v. STATE, 18 So. 3d 562 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . See § 777.03, Fla. Stat. (2003); Donaldson v. State, 722 So.2d 177, 184 (Fla.1998); Bowen v. . . .

In STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES- REPORT NO., 995 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 2008)

. . . instruction was adopted in July 1992 [603 So.2d 1175] and amended in 2008. 3.5(c) ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT § 777.03 . . . See § 777.03(1)(b), Fla. Stat. . . .

C. W. v. STATE, 861 So. 2d 1243 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . .” § 777.03, Fla. Stat. (2002). . . .

BOWEN, v. STATE, 868 So. 2d 541 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . The crime of accessory after the fact is defined by section 777.03(1), Florida Statutes (1997), as: Any . . .

WILSON, v. STATE, 824 So. 2d 335 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . The state responds that Wilson’s knowledge of the robbery could be inferred from the facts.Section 777.03 . . . which is “an essential element which must be proved before there can be a conviction under Section 777.03 . . .

In J. W. a v. LEITNER,, 801 So. 2d 295 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . While this remains a felony, see §§ 777.03(2)(c), 921.0022, Fla. . . .

BOWEN, v. STATE, 791 So. 2d 44 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . Section 777.03(1), Florida Statutes (1997), defines the crime of accessory after the fact as follows: . . . of the underlying crime of the principal, generally being one degree below the principal’s crime. § 777.03 . . . Because section 777.03(2) links the degree of Ms. . . . accessory after the fact was a third-degree felony, regardless of the severity of the underlying crime. § 777.03 . . . Bowen was charged with being an accessory after the fact to escape based upon sections 777.03 and 944.40 . . .

BRADLEY, v. STATE, 787 So. 2d 732 (Fla. 2001)

. . . State, 610 So.2d 1288 (Fla.1992); see generally § 777.03(3), Fla. . . .

HERNANDEZ, v. STATE, 749 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . Black’s Law Dictionary 14 (7th ed.1999) ; see § 777.03, Fla. Stat. (1997). . . . See § 777.03, Fla. Stat. (1997). . . . spelled out in the Standard Jury Instruction, which reads as follows: ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT F.S. 777.03 . . . JOAQUIN DEGOTI, SR., shah avoid or escape detection, arrest, trial or punishment, in violation of s. 777.03 . . .

STATE v. FRANCHI,, 746 So. 2d 1126 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . escapee’s wife, she would be exempt from criminal liability under the family member exception of section 777.03 . . .

HERNANDEZ, v. STATE, 750 So. 2d 50 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Florida Statutes (1997); and one misdemeanor count of accessory after the fact, in violation of section 777.03 . . .

SUNBEAM TELEVISION CORPORATION, d b a WSVN d b a WPLG v. STATE, 723 So. 2d 275 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . Statutes; (2) conspiracy to do same; and (3) acting as an accessory after the fact in violation of section 777.03 . . .

D. DONALDSON, v. STATE, 722 So. 2d 177 (Fla. 1998)

. . . . § 777.03, Fla. Stat. (1993). . . .

STATE v. SPIOCH,, 706 So. 2d 32 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . . § 777.03(3), Fla. Stat. (1995). Herrera v. State, 532 So.2d 54, 58 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Velunza v. . . .

A. MADIWALE, M. v. SAVAIKO,, 117 F.3d 1321 (11th Cir. 1997)

. . . Statute § 837.05, and allegedly being an accessory after the fact in violation of Florida Statute § 777.03 . . . that statute. b) Accessory After the Fact Savaiko also arrested Hogan for violating Florida Statute § 777.03 . . . the underlying crime was a misdemeanor, which would fall outside the scope of.the plain language of § 777.03 . . . 794.011(2), sexual battery on a child under twelve years of age by an offender under 18 years of age; § 777.03 . . .

S. FREUND, v. A. BUTTERWORTH,, 117 F.3d 1543 (11th Cir. 1997)

. . . Stat. ch. 777.03 (1983) (making it a third-degree felony to assist someone known to have committed a . . .

RAMOS, v. STATE, 696 So. 2d 461 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . The statute under which defendant was charged and convicted is section 777.03(1), Florida Statutes (1995 . . . the fact un der section 777.011, on the one hand, and being an accessory after the fact under section 777.03 . . .

ANDREWS, v. STATE, 693 So. 2d 1138 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . in any event he was an accessory after the fact, and therefore violated a law (specifically section 777.03 . . .

C. J. P. a v. STATE, 672 So. 2d 62 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . .” § 777.03, Fla.Stat. (1993). . . .

BROWN, v. STATE, 672 So. 2d 861 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . was charged with being an accessory after the fact to second degree murder in violation of section 777.03 . . . accessory charge and as grounds therefor asserted that the statute under which he was charged, section 777.03 . . . (emphasis added) § 777.03, Fla-Stat. (1993). . . . Chapter 95-184, § 13, at 1702-03, Laws of Florida has since rewritten section 777.03 to create varying . . . Subsection 777.03(1), Florida Statutes (1995), however, retains substantially the same wording as the . . .

A. TROXELL, v. STATE, 662 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . . §§ 777.03, 812.02(3), Fla.Stat. (1993). . . .

S. ELDER, v. STATE, 627 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . , sections 777.04(4)(b), 812.13(1), (2)(a), Fla.Stat. (1991), and accessory after the fact, section 777.03 . . .

MOCK, v. STATE, 625 So. 2d 1335 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . See § 777.03, Fla.Stat. (1991). . . .

F. M. a v. STATE, 622 So. 2d 71 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . Section 777.03, Fla.Stat. (1991). . . .

WILLIAMS, v. STATE, 601 So. 2d 1253 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . . (§§ 777.03, Fla.Stat.; 812.-13(1) and (2)(a), Fla.Stat.) . . . . § 777.03 and § 812.13(1) and (2)(a), Fla.Stat. (1989). . . . .

STATE v. FEAGLE,, 600 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . Statutes (1989), and served as accessory after the fact (Counts II through IV), in violation of section 777.03 . . .

LeCROY, v. STATE, 533 So. 2d 750 (Fla. 1988)

. . . . § 777.03, Fla. . . .

STATEN, v. STATE, 519 So. 2d 622 (Fla. 1988)

. . . Section 777.03, Florida Statutes (1985), defines an accessory after the fact as one who maintains or . . . In conclusion, we find the legislature intended section 777.03 to apply only to persons not principals . . . See § 777.03, Fla.Stat. (1985). . . . .

JACKSON, v. STATE, 513 So. 2d 1093 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . Paulette Sewell, was an accomplice, and hence an accessory after the fact within the meaning of section 777.03 . . . police — acts indicating a purpose to assist Jackson in avoiding detection in violation of section 777.03 . . . Nevertheless, the mere fact that Sewell was potentially liable for violating section 777.03 is of no . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR RE STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS- CRIMINAL, 508 So. 2d 1221 (Fla. 1987)

. . . doubt that the defendant was not entrapped”; (12) A new instruction on ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT, F.S. 777.03 . . . ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT F.S. 777.03 Before you can find the defendant guilty of being an accessory after . . .

MAQUIERA, v. STATE, 494 So. 2d 292 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . Section 777.03, Florida Statutes (1985) provides: Whoever ... maintains or assists the principal or accessory . . .

NEAL, v. STATE, 492 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . charge of accessory to shooting into an occupied dwelling (Section 790.19, Florida Statutes, Section 777.03 . . .

A. COLEMAN, Jr. v. STATE, 485 So. 2d 1342 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . He relies primarily upon the following language in Section 777.03, Florida Statutes: “Whoever, not standing . . . He argues that the language of section 777.03 is therefore relevant in determining appellant’s relationship . . . We consider that it was the legislature’s intent, in drafting the above language in section 777.03, to . . . relationship), or affinity (marital relationship), it could have employed the same language used in section 777.03 . . .

BORDEN, v. STATE, 479 So. 2d 823 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . primary, and only, offense for which the defendant was being sentenced was accessory after the fact (§ 777.03 . . .

STATE v. CALHOUN,, 479 So. 2d 241 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . See section 777.03, Florida Statutes. . . .

CARRILLO, v. STATE, 463 So. 2d 450 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . Pertinent parts of count II of the amended information alleged that the appellant, in violation of section 777.03 . . . failed to establish one of the material elements of the crime of accessory after the fact under section 777.03 . . . Because of the peculiar wording of section 777.03, the lack of familial relationship between the principal . . .

L. AKINS, v. STATE, 462 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . commission of a burglary (§ 810.02, Fla.Stat. (1983), and the use of accessories after the fact (§ 777.03 . . .

MORMAN, v. STATE, 458 So. 2d 88 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . Section 777.03, Florida Statutes (1983), provides: Whoever, not standing in the relation of husband or . . .

STATE OF FLORIDA v. CALHOUN, 7 Fla. Supp. 2d 3 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1984)

. . . See section 777.03, Florida Statutes. . . .

GAWRONSKI, v. STATE, 444 So. 2d 490 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . . § 777.03, Fla.Stat. (1981); Schramm v. State, 374 So.2d 1043 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). . . .

DAVIS, v. STATE, 436 So. 2d 196 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . Florida Statutes (1979), but, in the alternative, as an accessory after the fact pursuant to Section 777.03 . . .

STATE v. C. H. a, 421 So. 2d 62 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . This appeal concerns the constitutionality of section 777.03, Florida Statutes (1981), a law which permits . . . Section 777.03, Florida Statutes (1981), states in pertinent part: Whoever, not standing in the relation . . . Applying these principles to section 777.03, we hold that “consanguinity” and “affinity” are synonymous . . . In our view, section 777.03 fully satisfies this test. . . . Section 777.03, Florida Statutes (1981), immunizes criminal conduct. . . .

A. Y. G. a v. STATE, 414 So. 2d 1158 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . Florida Statutes (1979) but, in the alternative, as an accessory after the fact pursuant to Section 777.03 . . .

HOLLEY, v. STATE, 406 So. 2d 65 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . Section 777.03 Florida Statutes (1979). . . .

HARDY, v. B. A. GREADINGTON,, 405 So. 2d 768 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . Section 777.03, Florida Statutes (1979) says: Whoever, not standing in the relation of husband or wife . . .

WESTERMEIER, v. STATE, 395 So. 2d 231 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . Appellant was charged with being an accessory after the fact (§ 777.03, Fla.Stat. (1979)) to the felony . . .

RUIZ, v. STATE, 388 So. 2d 610 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

. . . his conviction on a charge of being an accessory after the fact to murder, in violation of Section 777.03 . . . avoid or escape detection, arrest, trial or punishment, shall be deemed an accessory after the fact. § 777.03 . . .

SAWYER, Jr. v. SANDSTROM,, 615 F.2d 311 (5th Cir. 1980)

. . . . §§ 777.03, 777.04 (1979). . . .

J. PACK, v. STATE, 381 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

. . . . § 777.03, Florida Statutes (1977). . . .

SCHRAMM, v. STATE, 374 So. 2d 1043 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

. . . Section 777.03, Florida Statutes (1977) and Bush v. State, 359 So.2d 556 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). . . . Affirmed in part, reversed in part. . “777.03 Accessory after the fact. . . .

STATE v. GLEASON,, 374 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

. . . indictment filed August 28,1978 with being an accessory after the fact to a felony, in violation of Section 777.03 . . .

C. DEXTER, v. STATE, 360 So. 2d 457 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978)

. . . . § 776.03, Fla.Stat. (1973) (current version at § 777.03, Fla.Stat. (1977)); § 775.082(4)(d), Fla.Stat . . .

W. C. BUSH, v. STATE, 359 So. 2d 556 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978)

. . . Section 777.03, Florida Statutes (1975). In Henderson v. . . .

ARTHUR, v. STATE, 351 So. 2d 60 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . Section 777.03, Florida Statutes (1975). . . .

HELMS, v. STATE, 349 So. 2d 726 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . The defendant was charged with violation of Section 777.03, Florida Statutes (1975), which provides: . . . This is an essential element which must be proved before there can be a conviction under Section 777.03 . . . His conviction as an accessory after the fact under Section 777.03 is reversed. . . .

The 2022 Florida Statutes (including 2022 Special Session A and 2023 Special Session B)

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

10 Cases from Casetext:Date Descending

Peart v. State

Millstein v. Holtz

Millstein v. Holtz

Cafe, Gelato & Panini LLC v. Simon Prop. Grp.

Branton v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr.

Rice v. State

In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases—Report 2018-02

In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases—Report 2018-02

In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases—Report 2018-02

Truthinadvertisingenforcers.Com v. Dish Network, LLC

Cases from cite.case.law: