Wilson v. State
159 So. 3d 316
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2015Background
- Wilson was convicted of sexual battery with physical force and kidnapping, and sentenced to life imprisonment for each in consecutive terms; on appeal, he challenging the kidnapping conviction as the movement/confinement was inconsequential or inherent in the sexual battery; the court agreed and reversed the kidnapping conviction and its sentence while affirming the sexual battery conviction and life sentence.
- Victim was attacked in a dimly lit vacant lot while walking at night; Wilson grabbed her, struck her, pulled down her clothes, had intercourse, and fled; the encounter lasted 5–7 minutes and the victim remained in struggle throughout.
- Florida statute 787.01(l)(a)(2) defines kidnapping as confinement with intent to commit or facilitate a felony; Faison principle holds movement/confinement must be more than incidental to the other crime.
- Trial court denied the motion for judgment of acquittal on kidnapping; appellate review is de novo; the court reviewed the scene and testimony and evaluated whether the movement was merely incidental, inherent, or had independent significance.
- Court held the movement and confinement were merely incidental, inherent, and did not independently facilitate the crime or reduce detection risk; kidnapping conviction reversed, sexual battery conviction affirmed.
- Judgment remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the victim’s movement confinement enough for kidnapping under Faison? | Wilson: movement was inconsequential or inherent | State: movement had independent significance | No; movement failed three-prong test; kidnapping reversed |
| Does evidence support the sexual battery conviction and its procedures on appeal? | Wilson admitted wrongdoing; no issue on sexual battery | N/A | Sexual battery affirmed; life sentence left intact |
Key Cases Cited
- Faison v. State, 426 So.2d 968 (Fla.1983) (definition of kidnapping requires more than incidental movement)
- State v. Buggs, 219 Kan. 203 (Kan.1976) (movement must have independent significance)
- Stanley v. State, 112 So.3d 718 (Fla.2d DCA 2013) (confinement related to restraint in sex crimes may be incidental)
- Simpkins v. State, 395 So.2d 625 (Fla.1st DCA 1981) (dragging victim within residence not materially different from restraint for sexual battery)
- Bush v. State, 526 So.2d 992 (Fla.4th DCA 1988) (dragging victim a short distance can sustain kidnapping if reduces detection)
- Harkins v. State, 380 So.2d 524 (Fla.5th DCA 1980) (relevant to confinement analysis under related Florida cases)
- Rockmore v. State, 140 So.3d 979 (Fla.2014) (de novo review of judgment of acquittal proceedings)