TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

TH v. State

TH v. State, 797 So. 2d 1291 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida · State Appellate Courts
Decided
October 31, 2001
Docket
No. 4D01-837
Judges
Gross
Citations
797 So. 2d 12912001 WL 1335267

Opinion

797 So.2d 1291 (2001)

T.H., a child, Appellant,

v.

STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D01-837.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

October 31, 2001.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Dea Abramschmitt, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Michael J. Neimand, Assistant Attorney General, Fort Lauderdale, and Steven A. Halim, Legal Intern, Nova Southeastern University, Shepard Broad Law Center, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

*1292 GROSS, J.

We affirm appellant's conviction for battery on a school board employee. § 784.081(3), Fla. Stat. (2000).

We reverse the conviction for knowingly disrupting or interfering with the lawful administration or functions of an educational institution. § 877.13(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2000). The statute seeks to prohibit acts which are "specifically and intentionally designed to stop or temporarily impede the progress of any normal school function or activity occurring on the school's property." M.C. v. State, 695 So.2d 477, 483 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997).

Appellant got into a fight with another student on a high school campus at 7:00 a.m., before school began. The fight was over a girl. The fuel for the fight was jealousy. There was no evidence of knowing or intentional conduct designed to disrupt a school function or activity. Also, no school function or activity was taking place at the time and location of the fight. Unlike A.C. v. State, 479 So.2d 297 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), appellant did not pick a fight with students waiting to go home on the school bus; transportation of students to and from school is clearly part of the administration of an educational institution under section 877.13(1). See id. at 298 .

We remand for the trial court to enter a new disposition order reflecting only the battery conviction.

KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
A.C. v. State, 479 So. 2d 297 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985) 5
M.C. v. State, 695 So. 2d 477 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997) 26
T.H. v. State, 797 So. 2d 1291 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001) 15

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list