IN THE INTEREST OF K.G., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1990-02-08
No. 89-1953
Shivers, C.J., Smith, J., Nimmons, J.
556 So. 2d 779 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1990) Caution
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

A student's conviction for battery upon a school bus driver under Fla. Stat. § 231.06 is affirmed because the 1986 amendment to the statute expanded its scope to include students, rendering prior case law interpreting the pre-amendment version inapplicable.


Holding

Section 231.06, Florida Statutes, as amended in 1986, applies to battery committed by students against school employees, and prior case law interpreting the pre-amendment version does not limit the statute's application.


Headnotes

[1] A statutory amendment that expands the class of persons whose conduct is prohibited renders prior judicial interpretations of the pre-amendment version inapplicable to th…

Previewing 1 of 1 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

Facts & Procedural History

A student was found guilty of battery upon a school bus driver in violation of section 231.06, Florida Statutes (1987).…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, a student, appeals an order of disposition finding him guilty of battery upon a school bus driver in violation of section 231.06, Florida Statutes (1987).1 Relying on Walker v. State, 501 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), appellant contends (in part) that this statute is intended to protect school employees against physical attacks primarily from outsiders, and that the facts in this case are not within the legislative intent described in Walker, Appellant has overlooked the fact that the Walker decision interpreted the 1985 version of section 231.06. Section 231.06 was amended in 1986. Chapter 86-210, § 2, Laws of Florida. The statute interpreted in Walker provided that “Whenever any parent or other person not subject to the discipline of the school commits an assault or battery ...” (emphasis supplied). The dicta in Walker obviously has no application to the changed language of section 231.06.

AFFIRMED.

SHIVERS, C.J., and SMITH and NIMMONS, JJ., concur. . Section 231.06, Florida Statutes, provides in part:

Whenever any student, parent, or other person commits an assault or battery upon any person employed in any capacity by a district school board and the employee is on school property or is away from school property on official school business, the offense for which the person is charged shall be classified:
**

(2) In the case of a battery, as a felony of the third degree ...


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • McMILLON v. State, 681 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)
    …cause it interprets the 1985 version of section 231.06. The legislature amended the statute in 1986 to indicate that persons “subject to the discipline of the school,” are no longer exempt from prosecution pursuant to this statute. See KG. v. State, 556 So. 2d 779 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). McMillon is not exempt even though he is also a member of the protected class. Keeping in mind the statute’s purpose, this interpretation neither leads to an unreasonable conclusion nor derogates legislative intent. Holly v. Aul…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw