Dicks v. State
2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 20268
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Dicks, Jr. was convicted of burglary of a dwelling in Florida (2009) after unlawfully entering a dwelling with intent to commit theft.
- The state’s theory included that the curtilage surrounding the dwelling could be considered part of the dwelling for burglary purposes.
- Deputies found Dicks and his brother under a mobile home, removing copper wiring; the yard was unenclosed and the evidence showed substantial wiring removal and damage.
- Defense opened by conceding trespass and theft but argued the yard/unenclosed space could not be part of a dwelling under the statute.
- During closing, the prosecutor paraphrased the dwelling definition in a way that included the yard and unenclosed areas; defense did not object.
- The standard jury instruction defined a dwelling to include the enclosed space of ground and outbuildings, but the prosecutor’s statements urged that the yard was part of the dwelling; trial court later read the standard instruction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the prosecutor’s misstatement of the dwelling definition was fundamental error. | State argues the misstatement did not reach fundamental error. | Dicks contends the misstatements rendered the trial fundamentally unfair. | Not fundamental error; conviction affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Hamilton, 660 So.2d 1038 (Fla. 1995) (curtilage requires enclosure per burglary statute)
- Serrano v. State, 64 So.3d 93 (Fla. 2011) (contemporaneous objection rule and fundamental error standard)
- Archer v. State, 934 So.2d 1187 (Fla. 2006) (fundamental error standard for improper prosecutorial comments)
- Kilgore v. State, 688 So.2d 895 (Fla. 1996) (contemporaneous objection rule and fundamental error guidance)
- Tindall v. State, 997 So.2d 1260 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) (entry by crawling under a structure constitutes entering a dwelling)
- Barton v. State, 797 So.2d 1276 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (burglary where defendant reached in over rails/inside space)
- J.L. v. State, 57 So.3d 924 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011) (unenclosed yard and entry into dwelling concepts)
- McDonald v. State, 743 So.2d 501 (Fla. 1999) (contemporaneous objection rule standard)
- Chandler v. State, 702 So.2d 186 (Fla. 1997) (contemporaneous objection rule applications)