ADOLFO A. MONTANO, 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.
Affirmed conviction for conspiracy to traffic in cocaine where defendant drove co-defendant to two meetings, retrieved money, and admitted acting as a broker with intent to share commission.
The evidence was sufficient to support a conspiracy to traffic in cocaine conviction based on defendant's transportation of co-defendant to meetings, retrieval of money, and admissions of brokering the transaction.
[1] Conspiracy to traffic in cocaine may be established through circumstantial evidence of the defendant's acts in transporting a co-defendant to meetings, facilitating the t…
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“[T]he crime of conspiracy consists of an express or implied agreement between two or more persons to commit a criminal offense. Both an agreement and an intention to commit an offense are necessary elements of this crime.”
Court stating the legal standard for conspiracy, citing Velunza v. State, 504 So. 2d 780, 782 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).
Montano drove a co-defendant to two meeting places where cocaine was discussed and sampled, then retrieved money for the purchase and was introduced t…
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 Agreement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. The evidence was sufficient to support a conviction of conspiracy to traffic in cocaine where appellant Adolfo A. Montano drove to two different meeting places with the co-defendant. Montano drove the co-defendant to the first meeting place, where the co-defendant agreed to purchase cocaine and was provided with a sample. Montano again drove the co-defendant to the second meeting place and left, evidently to retrieve the money for the purchase. Upon his return, Montano was introduced to the undercover officer who was posing as the seller. When the officer asked Montano whether he had the money, Montano nodded and pointed out an envelope in the back seat of his car. The officer went to the trunk of his car to retrieve the drugs and gave the signal to the other officers to make the arrest. After his arrest, Montano admitted that he acted as a broker, worked with the co-defendant, and intended to share a $500 commission with the co-defendant. “[T]he crime of conspiracy consists of an express or implied agreement between two or more persons to commit a criminal offense. Both an agreement and an intention to commit an offense are necessary elements of this crime.” See Velunza v. State, 504 So. 2d 780, 782 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). We are convinced that the State proved a conspiracy to traffic in cocaine through the acts of both Montano and the co-defendant and the admissions of Montano.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Campbell v. State, 935 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…required to present evidence establishing beyond a reasonable doubt that Brooks intended to commit the offense and committed an overt act toward its completion.”). The statutory elements of conspiracy are intent and agreement. See Montano v. State, 879 So. 2d 1264, 1265 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (stating that the elements of the crime of conspiracy are “an agreement and an intention to commit an offense”). Because the elements of conspiracy and attempt do not necessarily include the use or threat of physical force…
Authorities Cited
- Mariano E. Velunza v. State, 504 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)