Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

443 So. 2d 469

State v. White

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 11, 1984

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1984-01-11

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently December 1992

2 state decisions

Relies on 413 So. 2d 478 - State v. DiGuillio · 420 So. 2d 116 - State v. Tate

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1984-01-11

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1Appellant, State of Florida, appeals from an order granting a motion to dismiss an amended information purporting to charge appellee, Marvin White, with four counts of bookmaking in violation of section 849.-25(1), Florida Statutes (1981). Appellee was charged with taking or receiving bets (on various dates) on professional baseball, football and college football games. The wording of the counts of the information tracked the wording of section 849.25(1). Appellee argues that the decision of this court in State v. Tate, 420 So.2d 116 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982), requires that an information charging bookmaking, in order not to be fatally defective, must charge the defendant with the element of habitualness. Tatedoes not so hold, and we, therefore, reverse.

¶2This court in State v. DiGuillio, 413 So.2d 478 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982), considered and sustained an information nearly identical with the amended information dismissed below. While the state must, in order to convict for the offense of bookmaking, prove more than an isolated act of placing a bet, if the information tracks the language of the statute in charging multiple acts, it is sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss.

¶3Reversed and remanded.

BOARDMAN, A.C.J., and RYDER and CAMPBELL, JJ., concur.
/443/so2d/469 · .json · Public domain