DEANGELO ANDRE EVANS, 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.
DeAngelo Evans was convicted of armed robbery with a firearm and attempted armed robbery with a firearm using a starter pistol. The appellate court reversed in part, holding that the State failed to present sufficient evidence that the starter pistol was a "firearm" under Florida law, which requires proof it could expel a projectile or be readily converted to do so.
The State's evidence was legally insufficient to establish that the starter pistol was a "firearm" under Florida Statutes § 790.001(6). The only evidence—that the starter pistol made a loud "pop" when fired—merely demonstrated it performed its intended function of making noise, not expelling a projectile.
[1] A starter pistol, by itself, is not considered a firearm under Florida law unless the State proves it can expel a projectile or be readily converted to do so.
[2] The State bears the burden of proving that a starter gun used in a robbery could expel a projectile or be readily converted to expel a projectile to qualify as a firearm.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“any weapon (including a starter gun) which will, is designed to, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive”
Definition of firearm under Florida Statutes § 790.001(6), establishing the statutory requirement that a weapon must be designed to expel a projectile or readily convertible to do so
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceEvans was charged with two counts of armed robbery with a firearm and one count of attempted armed robbery with a firearm. At trial, a police officer …
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 Legal Sufficiency Of Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
GODERICH, Judge.
The defendant, DeAngelo Andre Evans, appeals his convictions for two counts of armed robbery with a firearm and one count of attempted armed robbery with a firearm. We affirm, in part, and reverse, in part.
At trial, a police officer testified that the “gun” used during the alleged robbery and attempted robbery was a starter pistol. He further testified that when he test-fired the starter pistol, it made a loud “pop.” The State did not present any evidence that the starter gun expelled a projectile when it was test-fired or that the starter pistol could readily be converted to expel a projectile.
At the close of the State’s case, the defendant moved for a judgment of acquittal arguing that the State had failed to prove that the defendant used a firearm during the alleged robbery. Specifically, the defense argued: “What we have here is a starter pistol with absolutely no testimony from anyone that it’s capable of expelling an object, which is what must be done so it can be considered a firearm.” The trial court denied the defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal. The jury returned a verdict finding the defendant guilty of two counts of armed robbery with a firearm and one count of attempted armed robbery with a firearm.
The defendant contends that the trial court erred by denying his motion for judgment of acquittal. We agree.
Section 790.001(6), Florida Statutes (1997), defines “firearm” as “any weapon (including a starter gun) which will, is designed to, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; the frame or receiver of any such weapon; any device; or any machine gun.... ” A starter pistol is not designed to expel a projectile. Thayer v. State, 609 So. 2d 150, 151 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992), review denied, 618 So. 2d 211 (Fla.1993); Charley v. State, 590 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). As such, the State has the burden of proving that “the starter gun could either expel a projectile, or be readily converted to do so.” Charley, 590 So. 2d at 6.
The only evidence that the State presented on the issue of whether the starter pistol was a “firearm” as defined by section 790.011(6) was that when the police officer test-fired the starter pistol, it made a loud “pop” sound. The only inference that can be drawn from this testimony was that the starter pistol did exactly what it was designed to do, make a loud noise. Because the State’s evidence was legally insufficient to establish that the starter pistol was a “firearm,” we reverse and remand for entry of judgments of conviction for two counts of robbery and one count of attempted robbery and for resentencing in conformity therewith.
The remaining issues that were raised by the defendant lack merit.
Affirmed, in part; reversed, in part; and remanded for entry of judgments and resentencing.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Akins v. State, 838 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…a shotgun was, so I’m assuming it was a sawed-off shotgun. I know I’ve heard of that before. I’ve heard of people cutting off the end so it’s shorter. That’s what I believe it was. To be for sure, I’m not definite. Akins argues that Evans v. State, 758 So. 2d 1282 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000), and Stanley v. State, 757 So. 2d 1275 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), support his argument that his conviction should be reversed. We disagree. The defendant in Evans was con [*639] victed of two counts of armed robbery with a firearm. A po…
-
Johnson v. State, 851 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)…everse and remand for the trial court to consider the merits of Appellant’s rule 3.850 motion challenging the factual basis for the imposition of his minimum mandatory sentence. See State v. Mancino, 705 So. 2d 1379, 1381 (Fla.1998); Evans v. State, 758 So. 2d 1282 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). FARMER, C.J., STEVENSON and GROSS, JJ., concur.…
-
Wilson v. State, 823 So. 2d 855 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…ing that whether a bb gun is a deadly weapon is a jury question, and evidence supported the jury’s finding that defendant’s bb gun was a deadly weapon). The state had the burden of proving that the cap gun constituted a weapon. See Evans v. State, 758 So. 2d 1282 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). Appellant’s motion was facially sufficient in alleging that reasonably' competent counsel should have raised the issue that a cap gun did not meet the statutory definition of a weapon. Counsel’s error was prejudicial because if i…
Authorities Cited
- Denovel Atoine Wilson v. State, 590 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Charley v. State, 590 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Thayer v. State, 609 So. 2d 150 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)