SCOTT AMMONS
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 1st DCA | 2018-08-16
No. 16-2084
253 So. 3d 130 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2018) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

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.


Holding

Conviction as a principal for trafficking in methamphetamine is reversed where evidence establishes intent to participate but fails to prove any affirmative act to assist in committing the crime.


Headnotes

[1] To sustain a conviction as a principal under the aider and abettor theory, the state must prove both that the defendant intended the crime be committed and that the defen…

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

Key Quotes

“To secure a conviction on an aider and abettor theory, the state must establish (1) that the defendant helped the person who actually committed the crime by doing or saying something that caused, encouraged, incited or otherwise assisted that person to commit the crime; and (2) that the defendant intended to participate in the crime.”

Evans v. State, establishing the two-part test for aider and abettor liability

Facts & Procedural History

Scott Ammons was charged as a principal for trafficking in methamphetamine. After his arrest, he admitted that he and other suspects should not have c…

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

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________

No. 1D16-2084 _____________________________

SCOTT AMMONS,

Appellant,

v. STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Baker County. James M. Colaw, Judge.

August 16, 2018 B.L. THOMAS, C.J.

Appellant was charged as a principal for trafficking in methamphetamine under sections 777.011 and 893.135, Florida Statutes. To sustain his conviction as a principal, the State was required to establish that Appellant “intend[ed] that the crime be committed and do some act to assist the other person in actually committing the crime.” Staten v. State, 519 So. 2d 622, 624 (Fla. 1988) (emphasis added); Evans v. State, 643 So. 2d 1204, 1205-06 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (“To secure a conviction on an aider and abettor theory, the state must establish (1) that the defendant helped the person who actually committed the crime by doing or saying something that caused, encouraged, incited or otherwise assisted that person to commit the crime; and (2) that the defendant intended to participate in the crime.”) (emphasis

2

added)). We review the evidence in a light most favorable to the State, including construing all inferences in favor of the State. Lynch v. State, 293 So. 2d 44 (Fla. 1974).

There was legally sufficient evidence to submit to the jury that Appellant “intended to participate in the crime,” Evans, 643 So. 2d at 1206, including Appellant’s post-arrest admission that he and the other suspects should not have completed the drug transaction. But there was not sufficient evidence that Appellant did some act to assist in the commission of the crime. Theophile v. State, 78 So. 3d 574, 577 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). Thus, under our de novo review of the trial court’s ruling denying Appellant’s motion for judgment of acquittal, Jones v. State, 790 So. 2d 1194, 1196 (Fla. 2001) (en banc), we reverse Appellant’s conviction as a principal under section 777.011, Florida Statutes. Based on our decision, we need not address the other issues raised by Appellant.

REVERSED and REMANDED with directions to discharge Appellant. LEWIS and MAKAR, JJ., concur.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.

_____________________________ Andy Thomas, Public Defender, Danielle Jorden, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Robert Quentin Humphrey, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Dominguez v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2026)
    …esented by the State must have been so wanting ‘that no view which the jury may lawfully take of it favorable to the opposite party can be sustained under the law.” Fogarty v. State, 403 So. 3d 1026, 1031 (Fla. 1st DCA 2024) (quoting Lynch v. State, 293 So. 2d 44, 45 (Fla. 1974)). We review the evidence in the light most favorable to the State and consider whether the trier of fact could find the elements of the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Id. McInnis v. State, 408 So. 3d 882, 886 (Fla. 1st DC…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw