Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

357 So. 2d 203

Docket No. HH-86.

Johnson v. State

Anthony Ozer JOHNSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided March 15, 1978.

Rehearing Denied April 17, 1978.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1978-03-15

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“Any prisoner confined in any prison, jail, road camp, or other penal institution, state, county, or municipal, working upon the public roads, or being transported to or from a place of confinement who escapes or attempts to escape from such confinement shall be guilty of a felony... .”

quoted by 3 later decisions, including Pumphrey v. State, 367 So. 2d 700 - State v. Akers

“is narrowly limited to the actual physical presence in the jail. Appellant had been committed to the jail and was in the lawful custody of the jail. 357 So.2d at 204 . Likewise, in the instant case, the terms”

quoted by 2 later decisions, including Pumphrey v. State, 475 So. 2d 671 - State v. Ramsey

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1978-03-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently August 2017

9 state decisions

6019781980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*204 Michael Minerva, Public Defender, and Janice G. Scott, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

¶2Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Michael H. Davidson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4Appellant seeks review of the judgment and sentence for escape, Section 944.40, Florida Statutes (1975). Appellant contends he is entitled to reversal because of an alleged variance between the gravamen of the information and the evidence adduced at trial.

¶5The information alleged that appellant "was lawfully confined in the Alachua County Adult Detention Center, ... and being then and there so confined, did unlawfully escape from such confinement, ... ." The evidence revealed that appellant was arrested and taken to the Alachua County Adult Detention Center. During the booking process, appellant apparently became ill and was escorted by a police officer to the emergency room of Alachua General Hospital for treatment. Appellant escaped while at the hospital. Appellant asserts there is a fatal variance because the evidence did not reveal that appellant escaped from the confinement of the Alachua County Adult Detention Center.

¶6Section 944.40, Florida Statutes (1975), provides:

"Any prisoner confined in any prison, jail, road camp, or other penal institution, state, county or municipal, working upon the public roads, or being transported to or from a place of confinement who escapes or attempts to escape from such confinement shall be guilty of a felony of the second degree, . .."

¶7We do not believe the term "confinement" is narrowly limited to the actual physical presence in the jail. Appellant had been committed to the jail and was in the lawful custody of the jail. This confinement may extend to the hospital from which appellant escaped. Although Sections 945.091 and 951.24, Florida Statutes (1975), specifically recognize that a prisoner may be regarded as "confined" even though not physically present in the correctional facility for the purposes of work-release programs and other rehabilitative purposes, the existence of these statutes does not require a narrow definition of the term "confinement."

¶8Accordingly, there was no fatal variance between the information and the evidence adduced at trial. Therefore, the judgment and sentence are AFFIRMED.

¶9MILLS, Acting C.J., and ERVIN and BOOTH, JJ., concur.

/357/so2d/203 · .json · Public domain