Carter v. State
2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 17694, 2009 WL 4060861, 23 So. 3d 1238 (2009)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
For the crimes of carjacking and robbery, the use of force is considered 'in the course of the taking' if the force and the taking constitute a continuous series of acts or events, even if the use of force occurs prior to the actual taking of the property.
Facts:
- Samuel Laroche, a taxicab driver, picked up Antonio Carter, Alvin Bell, and Bonnie Broderick and drove them to the Lafayette Motel.
- Upon arrival, Laroche exited the cab to search for his missing cell phone.
- Carter also exited the cab, turned off the engine, stated he would not pay the fare, and confronted Laroche about the missing phone.
- Carter then struck Laroche with a closed fist, causing him to fall, and continued to hit him on the face and neck until Bell intervened.
- After the beating stopped, Laroche picked up his glasses which had fallen off, but Carter demanded them.
- Laroche, fearing further confrontation, gave his glasses to Carter.
- Fearing Carter intended to put him in the open trunk, Laroche ran away from the scene.
- Carter then entered the driver's seat of the taxicab and drove away.
Procedural Posture:
- Antonio Carter was charged in a Florida trial court with carjacking, strong arm robbery, and felony driving while license revoked.
- A jury convicted Carter on all three counts.
- The trial court sentenced Carter to concurrent prison terms and ordered him to pay restitution.
- Carter (appellant) appealed his convictions and the restitution order to the Fourth District Court of Appeal of Florida, against the State of Florida (appellee).
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the use of force on a victim constitute an act 'in the course of the taking' for carjacking and robbery charges when the force precedes the taking, but both are part of a continuous series of events?
Opinions:
Majority - Gross, C.J.
Yes, the use of force constitutes an act 'in the course of the taking' when it is part of a continuous series of acts or events that includes the taking. The court affirmed the carjacking and robbery convictions because Carter's violence against Laroche was sufficiently connected in time and sequence to the taking of the glasses and the taxicab. The Florida statutes for both carjacking (§ 812.133) and robbery (§ 812.13) specify that an act is 'in the course of the taking' if it occurs 'prior to, contemporaneous with, or subsequent to the taking' and constitutes a 'continuous series of acts or events.' The court distinguished this case from Flores v. State, where the theft of a car was an unrelated 'afterthought' to a robbery inside a salon. Here, Carter turned off the car, beat Laroche, took his glasses, and immediately drove the cab away as the victim watched, which demonstrates a single, continuous criminal episode. The court found this situation analogous to Baptiste-Jean v. State, where violence inside a home was deemed part of the continuous act of stealing a car from the driveway. The court also reversed Carter's conviction for felony driving with a revoked license due to insufficient evidence from the state and reversed the restitution order because the trial court failed to hold a proper hearing.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the 'continuous series of acts or events' standard for Florida's carjacking and robbery statutes, reinforcing that the force and the taking do not need to be simultaneous. The ruling establishes that as long as the violence is logically and temporally connected to the subsequent taking, it satisfies the force element of the crime. This precedent makes it more difficult for defendants to argue that a taking was merely an 'afterthought' to a separate assault, thereby broadening the temporal scope for prosecutors to establish the required nexus between force and taking in violent theft cases.
Unlock the full brief for Carter v. State