IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
OF THE STATE OF
Appeal No. CRC 05-35APANO
Opinion filed __________________.
Appeal from a judgment and sentence
imposed by the Pinellas County Court
County Judge Dorothy Vaccaro
John Thor White, Esq.
Attorney for appellant
Ryan Lossius, Esq.
Assistant State Attorney
ORDER AND OPINION
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the
defendant, Sabrina Garrett’s, appeal from a judgment and sentence entered by
The defendant pleaded no contest to charges of giving a false name to a law enforcement officer. She reserved her right to appeal the denial of her motion to
The defendant argues that the trial court
should have granted her motion to dismiss because the undisputed facts do not
satisfy the essential elements of the crime charged. The
standard of review for the order denying the motion to dismiss is de novo. State
v. Pasko, 815 So.2d 680 (
A police officer went to the defendant’s house to serve a trespass warning on the defendant. The officer asked for the defendant’s identity. In response, the defendant gave the officer a false name, false social security number, and a false birth date. The defendant signed the trespass warning under the false name. The officer then went to the complainant, who was the defendant’s neighbor, with a copy of the warning. The complainant then noticed the defendant had given the wrong name. The officer then went back to the defendant, who admitted giving the officer wrong information. The defendant was arrested and charged with violating §901.36(1), Fla. Stat. (2004).
Under that statute: “It is unlawful for a person who has been arrested or lawfully detained by a law enforcement officer to give a false name, or otherwise falsely identify himself or herself in any way, to the law enforcement officer … .” A prerequisite to being guilty of violating this statute is that the defendant be “arrested or lawfully detained.” Under the facts of this case, the defendant was never arrested or lawfully detained. The officer merely knocked on her front door and asked her some questions. There was, therefore, no violation of this particular statute. The motion to dismiss should have been granted.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the judgment and sentence are reversed, and this case is remanded to the trial court so that it may enter an order of dismissal.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at
David A. Demers
_____________________________ Robert J. Morris, Jr.
Irene H. Sullivan
cc: State Attorney
John Thor White, Esq.