From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Adderly v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jan 22, 1985
462 So. 2d 574 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

Summary

holding that evidence sufficed to show defendant's possession of stolen auto when defendant was found sleeping in back seat and car keys were on floorboard next to defendant's hat

Summary of this case from Rivers v. State

Opinion

No. 83-3025.

January 22, 1985.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Robert P. Kaye, J.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Thomas G. Murray, Miami, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Julie S. Thornton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HUBBART and JORGENSON, JJ.


The appellant pled nolo to a charge of theft of a motor vehicle, reserving the present challenge to the denial of his sworn motion to dismiss under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.190(c)(4). We affirm.

Two policemen found Adderly sleeping on the back seat of an automobile which had been recently taken from its owner, Metropolitan Dade County. On the rear floorboard, they discovered his hat and, next to it, the keys to the vehicle. The presence of those keys established that Adderly was in control and therefore in possession of the car itself, see Shank v. State, 154 Ind. App. 147, 289 N.E.2d 315 (1972); cf. Wells v. State, 613 P.2d 201 (Wyo. 1980), and thus raised the inference of guilty knowledge that the car was stolen created by sec. 812.022(2), Fla. Stat. (1983). It also, and simultaneously, refuted the explanation offered to the officer by Adderly — that he had innocently crawled into an abandoned car looking for a place to sleep — so as to render the believability of that claim and the question of whether the statutory inference had been overcome for the trier of fact. State v. Graham, 238 So.2d 618 (Fla. 1970); P.N. v. State, 443 So.2d 193 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); State v. Fox, 404 So.2d 799 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). The (c)(4) motion was therefore properly denied.

We need not decide, therefore, whether mere presence in the back seat of an otherwise unoccupied car amounts to possession.

Compare R.A.L. v. State, 402 So.2d 1337 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981) (inference conclusively overcome by "unrefuted, exculpatory, and not unreasonable" explanation of possession).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Adderly v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jan 22, 1985
462 So. 2d 574 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

holding that evidence sufficed to show defendant's possession of stolen auto when defendant was found sleeping in back seat and car keys were on floorboard next to defendant's hat

Summary of this case from Rivers v. State

holding that evidence sufficed to show defendant's possession of stolen auto when defendant was found sleeping in back seat and car keys were on floorboard next to defendant's hat

Summary of this case from Rivers v. State
Case details for

Adderly v. State

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES ADDERLY, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Jan 22, 1985

Citations

462 So. 2d 574 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

Citing Cases

Rivers v. State

See A.D. v. State, 106 So. 3d 67, 70 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) ("In the context of an automobile theft, [intent]…

Rivers v. State

The trooper's identification of Rivers as the driver of the stolen Thunderbird established his possession of…