Case Name: Theodore LEE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1979-02-27
Citations: 368 So. 2d 395
Docket Number: No. 77-720
Parties: Theodore LEE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before BARKDULL, KEHOE and SCHWARTZ, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 368
Pages: 395–398

Head Matter:
Theodore LEE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 77-720.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Feb. 27, 1979.
Rehearing Denied March 30, 1979.
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Karen M. Gottlieb, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Joel D. Rosen-blatt, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before BARKDULL, KEHOE and SCHWARTZ, JJ.

Opinion:
KEHOE, Judge.
Appellant, defendant below, brings this appeal from his judgment of conviction and sentences for resisting an officer without violence and disorderly conduct. Appellant was sentenced to one year imprisonment and a concurrent sixty day sentence of imprisonment, respectively. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
On January 3, 1977, an information was filed charging appellant with three counts of battery upon a law enforcement officer, resisting an officer with violence to his person, disorderly conduct and battery. Appellant pleaded not guilty and a jury trial was held. At the close of appellee's case, the prosecution below, the trial court granted appellant's motion for judgment of acquittal as to the battery count. The jury returned verdicts of acquittal as to each of the battery upon a law enforcement officer charges and two verdicts of guilty were returned: one as to the lesser included offense of resisting an officer without violence and the other to the charge of disorderly conduct. Appellant was adjudicated and sentenced as set forth above. From his judgment of conviction and sentences, he appeals.
There is no point on appeal related to the disorderly conduct conviction and sentence; therefore, they are affirmed. However, in regard to appellant's conviction, under Section 843.02, Florida Statutes (1977), for resisting an officer without violence, we find error which does require reversal.
Appellant's defense to this latter and lesser included charge was that he was not lawfully arrested by the police and that he did not use violence to resist arrest. The record shows that the evidence adduced by appellant at trial as well as the arguments made by his defense counsel supported and advanced this theory of defense. What the record does not show, however, is that appellee fulfilled its burden under Section 843.02 to show the legality of the arrest which appellant was convicted of resisting without violence. Under Section 843.02 it is apparent that the proof of the legality of an arrest is an essential element to be shown by the prosecution. Here the record is devoid of any proof of the legality of the arrest which appellant resisted without violence. Without such proof, appellee failed to establish one of the essential elements of the crime for which appellant was convicted. Accordingly, his judgment of conviction and sentence for resisting an arrest without violence should be reversed. See Lowery v. State, 356 So.2d 1325 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); and Adlington v. State, 350 So.2d 1148 (Fla.3d DCA 1977).
We also note that appellant has a common law right to resist an unlawful arrest without the use of violence. See, e. g., Marshall v. State, 354 So.2d 107 (Fla.2d DCA 1978); and Adlington v. State, 350 So.2d 1148 (Fla.3d DCA 1977).
For the reasons set forth above, appellant's conviction and sentence for disorderly conduct are affirmed; and his conviction and sentence for resisting an officer without violence are reversed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to discharge appellant as to this latter offense.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with directions.
. We note that, although in the instant case appellant was charged under § 843.01, Fla.Stat. (1977), with resisting an arrest with violence, he requested a jury instruction on the offense of resisting an arrest without violence under § 843.02, Fla.Stat. (1977). It is this latter offense for which he was convicted (including the disorderly conduct charge). The appropriateness of § 843.02 as a lesser included offense under § 843.01 has not been raised in this appeal; however, we further note that, pursuant to the criteria articulated in Brown v. State, 206 So.2d 377 (Fla.1968), the information herein alleged all of the essential elements of § 843.02 (allegata) thereby falling within category four of Brown; however, for the reasons set forth herein, the requisite probata was not present.