Gould v. StateGould v. State
We review Gould v. State, 558 So.2d 481 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), to resolve asserted conflict with Wilcott v. State, 509 So.2d 261 (Fla. 1987); Penny v. State, 140 Fla. 155, 191 So. 190 (1939); and Bean v. State, 469 So.2d 768 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984).1
Gary Gould was charged with, among other things,2 two counts of sexual battery on a victim physically helpless to resist.
The district court affirmed Gould‘s convictions with the exception of his convictions under
When the appellate court determines that the evidence does not prove the offense for which the defendant was found guilty but does establish his guilt of a lesser statutory degree of the offense or a lesser offense necessarily included in the offense charged, the appellate court shall reverse the judgment and direct the trial court to enter judgment for the lesser degree of the offense or for the lesser included offense.
(Emphasis supplied.)
Neither party argues that sexual battery under
For
The elements of
(1) a sexual battery as defined by
section 794.011(1)(h), Florida Statutes (1985) , is committed;5(2) the act was not consented to; and
(3) the victim was physically helpless to resist.
(1) a sexual battery as defined by
section 794.011(h) is committed;(2) the act was not consented to; and
(3) the use of physical force and violence by the perpetrator is not likely to cause serious personal injury.
In this case, a
The state urges us to accept the district court‘s view that
The state relies on Gallo v. State, 491 So.2d 541 (Fla. 1986), for the proposition that permissive lesser-included offenses are necessarily included lesser offenses. Such reliance is misplaced. The question certified in Gallo was whether the state was entitled to jury instructions on necessarily included lesser offenses when the defendant waives such instructions. There was no dispute or discussion in Gallo regarding the appropriate characterization of the lesser offenses in that case. The opinion addressed only the certified question, which assumed for purposes of the question that the lesser offenses involved were necessarily included lesser offenses.6
For the foregoing reasons, we quash that part of the district court decision directing the trial court to adjudicate Gould guilty of
It is so ordered.
SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, McDONALD, GRIMES, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.
Notes
(4) A person who commits sexual battery upon a person 12 years of age or older, without that person‘s consent, under any of the following circumstances is guilty of a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084:
(a) When the victim is physically helpless to resist.
(5) A person who commits sexual battery upon a person 12 years of age or older, without that person‘s consent, and in the process thereof uses physical force and violence not likely to cause serious personal injury is guilty of a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another or the anal or vaginal penetration of another by any other object; however, sexual battery does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.