RONNIE NEAL, APPELLANT,
v.
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.
Ronnie Neal, a deputy sheriff convicted of burglary, grand theft, and accessory to shooting into an occupied dwelling, appealed the trial court's denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal and the imposition of a ten-year sentence departing from guidelines. The court affirmed both the conviction and the departure sentence, finding sufficient evidence supported the convictions and that abuse of his position as a law enforcement officer justified the sentence enhancement.
The trial court properly denied the motion for judgment of acquittal because the state presented competent, substantial evidence supporting every element of burglary and grand theft. The departure from guidelines was proper because abuse of Neal's position as a law enforcement officer to facilitate criminal activity constitutes a valid reason for sentencing departure.
[1] Competent, substantial evidence supporting every element of the charged offenses is sufficient to deny a motion for judgment of acquittal.
[2] Abuse of a position of public trust may constitute a valid reason for departing from recommended sentencing guidelines.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“the state has brought forth competent, substantial evidence to support every element of the crimes of burglary and grand theft”
Establishes the standard and finding supporting affirmance of conviction on sufficiency of evidence
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRonnie Neal was a deputy with the Gadsden County Sheriff's Department who was convicted of burglary and grand theft of a NAPA Auto Parts Store as an a…
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 Abuse Of Public Trust cases and more on FLexlaw
SHIVERS, Judge.
Ronnie Neal appeals the trial court’s denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal and the trial court’s departure from the recommended guidelines sentence. We affirm.
Ronnie Neal was a deputy with the Gadsden County Sheriff’s Department. He was convicted of burglary (Section 810.02, Florida Statutes) and grand theft (Section 812.-014, Florida Statutes) of NAPA Auto Parts Store based on his involvement as an aider and abettor. He also pled nolo contendere to the charge of accessory to shooting into an occupied dwelling (Section 790.19, Florida Statutes, Section 777.03, Florida Statutes). The trial court departed from the recommended guidelines sentence of any non-state prison sanction. Neal received a ten year sentence.
We affirm the denial of Neal’s motion for judgment of acquittal because the state has brought forth competent, substantial evidence to support every element of the crimes of burglary and grand theft. Downer v. State, 375 So. 2d 840, 845 (Fla.1979); Cunningham v. State, 385 So. 2d 721, 722 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1980), rev. denied, 402 So. 2d 613.
The trial court gave the following reason for departure from the recommended guidelines sentence:
The sentences are not in accordance with sentencing guidelines as such guidelines are wholly inadequate and inappropriate for application to the crimes involved here. The fact that defendant was a deputy sheriff and trusted law enforcement officer renders imposition of only non-state prison sanctions unthinkable. Only because defendant was such an officer fully cooperating with a person or persons actually perpetrating burglaries and thefts were these crimes made possible resulting in massive losses to the victims over a two month period. The defendant’s involvement in the shooting into the dwelling of the police chief is so reprehensible that only a substantial punishment near that of the maximum permitted by statute is appropriate.
We construe the paragraph to be a single reason sufficient to support deviation from the recommended sentence. The single reason is that the defendant used his position as an officer of the law to facilitate criminal activity. Abuse of a position of public trust has been held to be a proper reason for departure where the defendant, a police officer, furnished police-issued handcuffs to facilitate a crime. Spain v. State, 475 So. 2d 944, 946 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), rev. denied, 486 So. 2d 597 (Fla.1986).
AFFIRMED.
ZEHMER and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Moore v. State, 530 So. 2d 61 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…cted to the trial court’s reason for departure, that is, that appellant violated a position of trust. Breach of trust has been held a permissible reason for departure in some instances. See Hankey v. State, 485 So. 2d 827 (Fla. 1986); Neal v. State, 492 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Jefferson v. State, 489 So. 2d 860 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Williams v. State, 462 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), review denied, 471 So. 2d 44 (Fla.1985); Ross v. State, 478 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). In those cases which appro…
-
Jefferson v. State, 549 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)…eviously ruled that a defendant’s use of his position as an officer of the law to facilitate criminal activity is a valid reason to depart from a guidelines sentence because such use constitutes an abuse of a position of public trust. Neal v. State, 492 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). It follows, therefore, that the reason for the guidelines departure in this case was valid because supported by the evidence. The conviction and sentence is reversed and the cause is remanded with directions to enter a judgment…
-
Vidal v. State, 518 So. 2d 939 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…eparture.1 First, addressing the grounds contained in the motion apparently adopted by the trial court, we hold that “abuse of position of trust” is a valid reason for departure, see Cason v. State, 508 So. 2d 448 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Neal v. State, 492 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Spain v. State, 475 So. 2d 944 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), review denied, 486 So. 2d 597 (Fla.1986), and is supported by credible evidence. The second reason, “extreme risk to the safety of citizens” is a valid justification for upward…
Authorities Cited
- Downer v. State, 375 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 1979)
- Cunningham v. State, 385 So. 2d 721 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- Spain v. State, 475 So. 2d 944 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)