Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

573 So. 2d 179

Docket No. 89-03482.

Knott v. State

Jamie KNOTT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 18, 1991.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1991-01-18

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently October 2007

8 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“[i]ntentionally or knowingly causes great bodily harm, permanent disability, or permanent disfigurement.”

quoted by 2 later decisions, including Beard v. State, 737 So. 2d 1208 - Washington v. State

Relies on 413 So. 2d 469 - State v. Horvatch

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1991-01-18

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Lawrence D. Shearer of McDonald and Shearer, Lakeland, for appellant.

¶2Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Joan L. Greenberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., Miami, for appellee.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4The appellant contends and the appellee agrees that it was error by the trial court to convict the appellant of aggravated battery. While there was testimony to support a conviction for battery, there was *180 nothing to indicate that the injuries received by the victim were intended by the appellant. In fact, following a nonjury trial, the trial judge made a specific finding that the defendant did not intend to cause injury to the victim. Aggravated battery is a specific intent crime. State v. Horvatch,413 So.2d 469 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). Section 784.045(1)(a)1, Florida Statutes, defines aggravated battery's specific intent as the intent to cause great bodily harm, permanent disability or permanent disfigurement.

¶5Since no such intent was proven, we reverse and remand with instructions that the trial court vacate the judgment and sentence for aggravated battery, and enter a judgment for a simple battery and resentence the appellant accordingly.

¶6SCHOONOVER, C.J., and SCHEB and HALL, JJ., concur.

/573/so2d/179 · .json · Public domain