From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hardwick v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Sep 10, 2009
16 So. 3d 1045 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

Summary

In Hardwick v. State, 16 So.3d 1045 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009), as in this case, the defendant appealed his convictions for burglary of a building and possession of burglary tools.

Summary of this case from Clark v. State

Opinion

No. 1D07-6216.

September 10, 2009.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Duval County, Mallory D. Cooper, J.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Glenna Joyce Reeves, Assistant Public Defender, Office of the Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, and Joshua R. Heller, Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.


Appellant, Jerry Hardwick, appeals his convictions for burglary of a building and possession of burglary tools. We affirm the trial court's denial of Hardwick's motion to dismiss, but reverse the court's denial of Hardwick's motion for judgment of acquittal on the charge of possession of burglary tools, because the evidence did not establish that he intended to use the tool found in his possession to commit a burglary or a trespass.

The state did not put on any evidence of forced entry, but only evidence that Hardwick carried wire cutters in order to cut copper tubing and electrical wiring inside a house under construction for the purpose of stealing it. The offense of possession of burglary tools requires proof that the defendant used or intended to use the tools in the course of unlawfully entering the premises of another, which is not satisfied by proof that the defendant intended to use the tools to commit an offense after entering the premises. See Calliar v. State, 760 So.2d 885 (Fla. 1999) (quashing the conviction for possession of burglary tools because the evidence showed that the defendant entered through an open gate, and thus the state proved only that he possessed the tools with the intent to commit a theft inside and not that he intended to use the tools to get onto the premises). Accord Burke v. State, 672 So.2d 829 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

WOLF, PADOVANO, and THOMAS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Hardwick v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Sep 10, 2009
16 So. 3d 1045 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

In Hardwick v. State, 16 So.3d 1045 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009), as in this case, the defendant appealed his convictions for burglary of a building and possession of burglary tools.

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

Hardwick v. State

Case Details

Full title:Jerry HARDWICK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Sep 10, 2009

Citations

16 So. 3d 1045 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

Citing Cases

Clark v. State

We affirm issues one and three without discussion, but we reverse as to the second issue. We find that the…

Fortson v. State

“The offense of possession of burglary tools requires proof that the defendant used or intended to use the…