A.C., A JUVENILE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A juvenile was adjudicated delinquent on five counts including battery, trespass, disorderly conduct, and interference with the administration of an educational institution after fighting with students on a school campus. The appellate court affirmed the delinquency adjudication, holding that school authorities' oversight of student transportation is part of the administration of an educational institution, even after the school day has ended.
The trial court did not err in denying the motion for acquittal. School authorities' duties include overseeing the orderly and safe transportation of students to and from school, and the evidence showed the appellant interfered with this function. Even assuming arguendo the appellant was correct, the adjudication would be sustained on the remaining four unchallenged counts.
[1] Interference with the administration of an educational institution can include conduct that disrupts the orderly and safe transportation of students to and from school, e…
[2] An adjudication of delinquency based on multiple counts will be affirmed if at least one count is valid and unchallenged on appeal.
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Clearly, part of the administration duties of the school authorities consists of overseeing the orderly and safe transportation of students to and from school.”
Establishes that school administration duties extend beyond school hours to include supervision of student transportation
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA juvenile nonstudent and others went onto the Allapattah Elementary School campus and engaged in a fight with students waiting for the school bus to …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Delinquency Petition cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
A petition for delinquency was filed against the appellant charging him with two counts of battery, one count of trespass upon school property, disorderly conduct, and interference with the administration of an educational institution. After hearing on the charges, the appellant moved for acquittal on the charge of interference with the administration of an educational institution and on the charge of disorderly conduct on the ground that there was no school function disturbed by the appellant and no evidence that he caused any disturbance of the peace. The motion was denied, the appellant was adjudicated delinquent on all counts, and placed in a community control program.
The instant case arose when the appellant, a nonstudent, and others went on the school campus at Allapattah Elementary School and engaged in a fight with students waiting for the school bus to take them home from school.
The sole issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred in denying the motion for judgment of acquital on the count charging interference with the administration of an educational institution, where as a matter of law the school day had ended and therefore, the alleged conduct could not have interfered with the administration of an educational institution. Clearly, part of the administration duties of the school authorities consists of overseeing the orderly and safe transportation of students to and from school. The evidence shows the appellant interfered with this function and his point is without merit. Assuming arguendo, that the appellant is correct, the adjudication of delinquency on the remaining four counts are not challenged herein and any one or all would be sufficient to sustain the order appealed. See J.B. v. State, 405 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); In the Interest of I.D.K., 360 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); W.S. v. State, 353 So. 2d 181 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977).
Therefore the adjudication of delinquency is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- S.S. v. State, 405 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- In the Interest of I. D. K., 360 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)
- W. S. v. State, 353 So. 2d 181 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)