Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...icious prosecution case, and we remand this cause for a new trial. The record reflects that Michael Mancusi sued Alamo-Rent-A-Car (Alamo) for malicious prosecution based on Mancusi's arrest for failure to return a rental car to Alamo in violation of section 817.52(3), Florida Statutes (1985)....

...Several years later, according to Mr. Willingham, he was stopped in Orlando by Officer Wayne Costa of the Orlando Police Department. Officer Costa was investigating an outstanding warrant issued in Osceola County for failure to redeliver a hired vehicle, in violation of section 817.52, Florida Statutes (2003)....

...a vehicle with intent to defraud. We reverse and remand for a new trial. The State charged Vasquez with committing grand theft, in violation of section 812.014, Florida Statutes (1993), and obtaining a vehicle with intent to defraud, in violation of section 817.52, Florida Statutes (1993)....

...Rent-A-Car [hereinafter Alamo]. We reverse and remand for a new trial. Mancusi brought a malicious prosecution action against Alamo subsequent to the termination of a criminal case in which Mancusi was charged with and prosecuted for having violated section 817.52(3), Florida Statutes (1985), failure to redeliver a hired vehicle....

...cases whenever it could be shown — as is likely often the case — that the prospective renter intended to violate the restrictions as to the vehicle's use at the time he rented it and had thus perpetrated a criminal fraud. [6] See §§ 812.012(2), 817.52(1) Fla....

...ts of a violation of the agreement while relieving it of the burden of tort liability. [5] The same should be true of the other end of the entrustment-possession continuum. The fact that it may be a crime to fail timely to redeliver a hired vehicle, § 817.52(3), Fla....

...We affirm the conviction and sentence. Nonetheless, we remand with directions to correct a scrivener’s error in the judgment. Appellant was charged with, entered a plea to, and was sentenced for failure to redeliver a hired vehicle in violation of section 817.52(3), Florida Statutes (2009)....

...Gen., Tallahassee, and Katherine V. Blanco, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee. OTT, Chief Judge. Appellant's probation was revoked because he failed to pay monthly cost of supervision fees and because he violated the law by failing to redeliver a hired vehicle. See § 817.52(3), Fla....

...*1011 Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Sue-Ellen Kenny, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for respondent, State of Florida. PER CURIAM. Petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus challenging his pretrial detention for third-degree felony failure to return a hired vehicle. See § 817.52(3), Fla....

...ily or permanently: (a) Deprive the other person of a right to the property or a benefit therefrom. (b) Appropriate the property to his own use or to the use of any person not entitled thereto. The failure to return a hired vehicle statute provides: 817.52(3), FAILURE TO REDELIVER A HIRED VEHICLE....

...at the termination of the period of which it was let, shall, without the consent of such person or persons and with intent to defraud, abandon or willfully refuse to redeliver such vehicle as agreed shall, upon conviction, be guilty of a felony ... § 817.52(3), Fla.Stat....

..., to convict appellant of both. See Thompson v. State, 585 So.2d 492 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991). REVERSED; REMANDED for resen-tencing. THOMPSON, J., concurs. W. SHARP, J., concurs in result only. . § 812.014(l)(a), (b) & (2)(c)(4), Fla.Stat. (1993). . § 817.52(3), Fla.Stat....

...cedes this issue. 1 We reverse and remand to remove the conviction for petit theft and remove the fine. Appellant hired a taxi with the intent not to pay for the service. She was charged and convicted of hiring a vehicle with intent to defraud under section 817.52(2), Florida Statutes (2012)....

...Florida, 894 So.2d 941, 947 (Fla.2005)); see also State v. McCloud, 577 So.2d 939, 941 (Fla.1991). In this case, a comparison of the elements of both offenses reflects that all the elements of obtaining a vehicle with intent to defraud by trick or false representation under § 817.52(1), Florida Statutes, (Count II), are included within the elements of grand theft under § 812.014(1), (Count I)....

...VAN NORTWICK, MARSTILLER, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur. . The elements of obtaining a vehicle with intent to defraud by trick or false representation are: (1) intent to (2) obtain a vehicle by [3] defrauding the owner or any person lawfully possessing the vehicle by trick or false representation. § 817.52(1), Fla....

...s due back to Enterprise. The supervisor then submitted the affidavit to local law enforcement. The affidavit did not request Renter’s arrest. The following day, while Renter was driving the vehicle, police stopped and arrested him pursuant to section 817.52(3), Florida Statutes (2017) (“Failure to Redeliver Hired Vehicle”)....

...4th DCA 2020). In both Sampaio and the instant case, the arrested party argued the 4 reporting/prosecuting party acted contrary to section 812.155. However, here, as in Sampaio, Renter was arrested only pursuant to section 817.52(3), Florida Statutes (2017), a separate and distinct statute from section 812.155. Id. at 124. Thus, as in Sampaio, we reject Renter’s argument about alleged defects in Enterprise’s communications, including its written demand, because section 817.52(3) does not include nor impose a notice requirement. Id. Pertinent to both Sampaio and the instant case, section 817.52(3)’s probable cause focus is whether, at the termination of the rental period, the renter, without the consent of the party “letting such motor vehicle,” “willfully refuse[s] to redeliver such vehicle as agreed.” § 817.52(3), Fla....

a misdemeanor, as specifically proscribed by § 817.52(3). The trial court agreed and determined that

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING WARNER, J. We grant the motion for rehearing, withdraw our previously issued opinion, and substitute the following in its place. Appellant was convicted in Broward County of a violation of section 817.52(3), Florida Statutes (2001), for failure to return a car she rented in Atlanta, Georgia....

...From this judgment and sentence she appeals. Appellant claims the court erred in refusing to give jury instructions on both venue and jurisdiction, claiming that the evidence established the offense occurred in Georgia because she failed to return the vehicle to the Atlanta agency. Section 817.52(3) provides: Whoever, after hiring a motor vehicle under an agreement to redeliver the same to the person letting such motor vehicle or his or her agent, at the termination of the period for which it was let, shall, without the consent...

The Honorable Bruce H. Colton State Attorney Nineteenth Judicial Circuit 411 South Second Street Fort Pierce, Florida 34950 Dear Mr. Colton: You ask substantially the following questions: 1. Does section 817.52 (2), Florida Statutes, apply when an individual hires a taxicab and, upon reaching the destination, refuses to pay for the ride or states that he or she has no money and cannot, or will not, pay for the cab's service? 2. Does section 817.52 (2), Florida Statutes, apply to an individual who drives a taxicab under an agreement with the owner that characterizes the driver as an independent business person purchasing the services of the cab's owner when the individual fails to remit the rate of payment at the end of a shift as provided in the agreement? In sum: 1. Section 817.52 (2), Florida Statutes, applies to any individual who hires a taxicab and, after receiving the service, does not pay or offer to pay for the hiring of the cab. 2. While the failure of a driver to remit payments as provided in an agreement with the owner of a taxicab would appear to be in the nature of a private contractual matter, whether to prosecute the individual pursuant to section 817.52 (2), Florida Statutes, is within the discretion of the state attorney. Question One Section 817.52 (2), Florida Statutes, provides: HIRING WITH INTENT TO DEFRAUD....

...Thus, when an individual engages the service of a taxi and fails to pay or offer to pay for the service after it has been provided, he or she could be charged with obtaining the vehicle with intent to defraud the owner or person lawfully in possession of the taxi pursuant to section 817.52 (2), Florida Statutes....

...the requisite failure to offer to pay that would allow the prosecutor prima facie proof of the individual's intent to defraud may not be present. Ultimately, it is within the discretion of the state attorney whether to prosecute an individual under section 817.52 , Florida Statutes....

...t is unclear whether the agreement would be solely for the hiring of the vehicle. The determination of whether a driver who fails to remit the rate of payment at the end of a shift may be charged with obtaining a vehicle with intent to defraud under section 817.52 (2), Florida Statutes, is a mixed question of law and fact that may not be answered by this office....

...Such a determination would depend upon the specific facts and conclusions drawn regarding the effect of the agreement between the owner and the driver. If it is found that the driver is only renting the car from the owner, then the failure to remit payment for such rental would allow prosecution under section 817.52 (2), Florida Statutes. If, however, the agreement is determined to be a sale by the owner to the driver of taxicab services, that incidentally includes the use of the car, prosecution pursuant to section 817.52 (2), Florida Statutes would be within the discretion of the state attorney. Accordingly, it is my opinion that any individual who hires a taxicab and who, after receiving the service, does not pay or offer to pay for the hiring of the taxicab would be subject to criminal charges under section 817.52 (2), Florida Statutes. Whether section 817.52 (2), Florida Statutes, would apply to a driver who fails to remit payments as provided in an agreement with the owner of a cab service would depend upon the facts of the particular situation and prosecution thereof would be within the discretion of the state attorney....

...e. This case involves an order dismissing an information under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(c)(4). The State filed an information charging the defendant with willfully and fraudulently failing to redeliver a hired vehicle in violation of section 817.52(3), Florida Statutes....

...The state appeals an order granting a motion to dismiss under Rule 3.190(c)(4), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. The defendant is charged with failing to timely return a leased vehicle, although it was returned prior to the filing of the information. Section 817.52(3), Florida Statutes (1985), provides: (3) FAILURE TO REDELIVER HIRED VEHICLE....

...senberg, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellee. KLINGENSMITH, J. The State of Florida appeals the dismissal of an information charging the defendant, Robert Sampaio, with failure to redeliver a hired vehicle “contrary to” section 817.52(3), Florida Statutes (2016). The trial court dismissed the information on the ground that the defendant did not initial a paragraph with the specific language required by section 812.155(6), Florida Statutes (2016). Because the State charged the defendant under section 817.52(3), and not under section 812.155, we reverse. The defendant was charged under section 817.52(3) for failure to redeliver a hired vehicle....

...mandated by section 812.155(6) because the agreement “does not encompass the statutory language nor was it initialed by the renter.” The State filed a response to the defendant’s motion to dismiss, pointing out that the defendant was charged under section 817.52(3)—not under section 812.155....

...legislative intent.” Daniels v. Fla. Dep’t of Health, 898 So. 2d 61, 64 (Fla. 2005); see also Brown v. City of Vero Beach, 64 So. 3d 172, 174 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011); Miles v. Parrish, 199 So. 3d 1046, 1048 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). In this case, the defendant was charged under section 817.52(3), which defines the criminal offense of failure to redeliver a hired vehicle as follows: (3) FAILURE TO REDELIVER HIRED VEHICLE.—Whoever, after hiring a motor vehicle under an agreement to redeliver...

...and with intent to defraud, abandon or willfully refuse to redeliver such vehicle as agreed shall, upon conviction, be guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. § 817.52(3), Fla. Stat. (2016). Notably, section 817.52(3) does not contain any provision requiring written and initialed notice as a prerequisite to prosecution. Here, the trial court agreed with the defendant’s arguments and applied the requirements of a separate statute to his case. That statute, section 812.155(3), defines the criminal offense of failure to return hired or leased personal property. Although this offense is similar to the offense established under section 817.52(3), section 812.155(3) differs from section 817.52(3) in the following respects: first, section 812.155(3) uses the phrase “personal property or equipment,” instead of “motor vehicle”; and second, section 812.155(3) makes no reference to any “intent to defraud”: (3)...

...refusal to redeliver the property, punishable in accordance with section 812.155, Florida Statutes. § 812.155(6), Fla. Stat. (2016) (emphasis added). Here, the trial court erred by applying the notice requirement of section 812.155 to a prosecution under section 817.52—a separate and distinct statute. The plain language of section 817.52 does not include any notice requirement, nor does it reference section 812.155. Moreover, the plain language of section 812.155(6) makes clear that the notice requirement is a prerequisite to prosecution “under this section,” meaning section 812.155. Prosecution of the defendant under section 817.52(3) did not require compliance with the notice requirement found in section 812.155(6). Although it appears that the defendant could have been charged under either statute, because the statutes proscribe similar conduct, the defendant was charged solely under section 817.52 and not section 812.155. Section 812.155 is a general statute that applies to rental property or equipment, whereas section 817.52 is a specific statute applicable solely to the leasing of vehicles....

...The purpose of the notice requirement contained in section 812.155 is to notify renters of the permissive inference that a failure to return rental property or equipment upon the expiration of the rental period is evidence of abandonment or refusal to redeliver the property. By contrast, section 817.52 does not create any such permissive inference. And, unlike section 812.155, section 817.52 requires proof of “intent to defraud, abandon or willfully refuse to redeliver” the property rather than allowing for a permissive inference to be made. 4  Because the wording of section 817.52(3) “is not ambiguous, unreasonable, or illogical,” courts may not go beyond its clear wording and plain meaning to add to the statute’s provisions....

...tutory construction, the statute is still ambiguous. See Kasischke v. State, 991 So. 2d 803, 814 (Fla. 2008). The rule of lenity is inapplicable when a statute is unambiguous. See Hopkins v. State, 105 So. 3d 470, 475 (Fla. 2012). Here, because section 817.52 is unambiguous, the rule of lenity does not apply. Because the unambiguous language of section 817.52(3) does not incorporate section 812.155(6)’s notice requirement, the analysis ends here. This court cannot look behind the plain language of the statute or resort to the rules of statutory construction to ascertain legislative intent. Inserting section 812.155(6)’s notice provision into section 817.52(3) by judicial interpretation, or by ignoring the words “under this section,” creates a substantive prerequisite to establishing a defendant’s criminal liability not expressly intended by the Legislature....

...1993) (holding that the court could not expand the scope of the plain language of a statute as “the Legislature, rather than [the] Court” would be “the proper party to do so”). 5  Accordingly, because section 817.52 does not include a notice requirement, the trial court erred in granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss on the basis that the rental agreement did not satisfy section 812.155(6)’s notice requirement....

redeliver a hired vehicle in contravention of Section 817.52(3), Florida Statutes. The defendant filed a

... UPON CONFESSION OF ERROR Petitioner, Terrance Benjamin, seeks a writ of habeas corpus, challenging his pretrial detention. Petitioner was charged with failure to return a hired vehicle, a third-degree felony. See § 817.52(3), Fla....