Summary
In Jones v. State, 931 So.2d 243 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006), the trial court admitted evidence of a robbery and aggravated assault of a totally different victim than the victim of a murder and robbery that took place shortly thereafter.
Summary of this case from State v. RambaranOpinion
No. 5D05-1770.
June 16, 2006.
Appeal from the Circuit Court, Orange County, Daniel P. Dawson, J.
James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Rebecca M. Becker, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Carmen F. Corrente, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
Jones appeals from his judgment and sentence for first degree murder. He contends that evidence regarding a robbery and aggravated assault of a different man, Sammie Pryor, that took place shortly before the murder and robbery of Juan Onate, the victim in this case, should have been excluded because it was improper similar fact evidence or Williams rule evidence. We affirm.
Williams v. State, 110 So.2d 654 (Fla.), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 847, 80 S.Ct. 102, 4 L.Ed.2d 86 (1959); § 90.404(2)(a), Fla. Stat.
Although the circumstances of the two crimes were different, the Pryor robbery was properly admitted in evidence because it was relevant to prove the murder charge. It occurred immediately before the murder and the events of the evening were inextricably intertwined, part of a continuing episode involving the same people, vehicle and weapon. See Griffin v. State, 639 So.2d 966 (Fla. 1994), cert. denied, 514 U.S. 1005, 115 S.Ct. 1317, 131 L.Ed.2d 198 (1995); Hall v. State, 403 So.2d 1321 (Fla. 1981).
Five young men driving around late at night in a truck, drinking and smoking marijuana, Jones driving and in possession of a .38 special revolver that was kept in the truck by the owner, motivated by intent to rob for money, with racial overtones.
AFFIRMED.
PLEUS, C.J. and MONACO, J., concur.