ANTONYO WILBORN, 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.
Appellant's burglary conviction reversed because his brief refuge on a neighbor's open, partially-screened porch while fleeing police constitutes trespass, not burglary of a dwelling, and the evidence does not support the greater offense.
A defendant's brief use of an open, partially-screened porch as temporary refuge while fleeing police does not constitute burglary of a dwelling but rather the lesser-included offense of trespass.
[1] A defendant's momentary refuge on an open, partially-screened residential porch while fleeing police constitutes trespass rather than burglary of a dwelling when the evid…
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 intelligenceAntonyo Wilborn was arrested on a community control violation warrant. While police attempted to arrest him, he fled and briefly took refuge on a neig…
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 Burglary Of A Dwelling cases and more on FLexlaw
ALTENBERND, Acting Chief Judge.
Antonyo Wilborn was arrested on a warrant for violation of community control. He does not challenge the order of violation or the six years’ imprisonment he received as a result of that violation. Rather, he challenges a conviction for burglary of a dwelling and the resulting fifteen-year sentence arising from his conduct when officers attempted to arrest him.
Mr. Wilborn knew he had not complied with the conditions of his community control. When the police attempted to arrest him, he briefly fled. During this short excursion, while fleeing from the police— and perhaps more significantly from three large neighborhood dogs, including a “wolf-chow mix” — Mr. Wilborn spent a few seconds’ refuge on a neighbor’s back porch. Thereafter he continued his flight a short distance before the police apprehended him. We have reviewed the record and conclude that, although the evi dence supports a conviction for the lesser-included offense of trespass, Mr. Wilborn’s brief use of the open, partially-screened porch as a temporary safe haven does not establish competent, substantial evidence to support a conviction for burglary of a dwelling. As a result, we reverse the conviction for burglary and the resulting fifteen-year sentence. On remand, the trial court shall enter a judgment for the lesser-included offense of trespass and sentence Mr. Wilborn accordingly.
Reversed and remanded.
CASANUEVA and STRINGER, JJ„ concur.