(1) Whoever, with intent to defraud any person shall, in person or by agent, make, draw, utter, deliver, or give any check, draft, or written order for the payment of money upon any bank, person, or corporation and secure from such person goods or services for or on account of such check, draft, or written order, whether such goods or services are valued at the amount of such check, draft, or written order or at a greater or lesser value, and who shall, pursuant to and in furtherance of such intent to defraud, stop payment on such check, draft, or written order, shall be deemed to be guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084, if the value of the goods or services secured for or on account of such check, draft, or written order is $150 or more; and if the value of the goods or services secured for or on account of such check, draft, or written order is less than $150, he or she shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(2) This section shall be taken to be cumulative and shall not be construed to repeal any other statute now in effect.
Cited 4 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal
...as "arrested, imprisoned, booked, mugged (sic) and fingerprinted." The trial judge granted Dr. Wiley a summary judgment, and Mrs. Calleja appeals. We reverse. The summary judgment recites that the judge has taken notice of Fla. Stat. §§ 713.58 and 832.041, F.S.A....
..." There are two simple answers to this theory. The first is that Sandra Calleja did not stop payment on the check. The second is that Dr. Wiley did not charge a criminal offense under Section 713.58, but rather under the general worthless check law, § 832.041....
HENDRY, Judge. By a two count information, the state charged appellant with violating F.S. Section 832.041, F.S.A., by stopping payment on two checks dated August 17, 1970 for $17,000 and $20,000....
...of the stock, where the debt Pena owed was only $25,000. However, Pena and Schilling had a multitude of different transactions, and the basic issue at trial was not insufficiency of consideration or usury, but a criminal violation by appellants of F.S. 832.041, F.S.A....
WEBSTER, J. Appellant seeks review of a conviction, following a non-jury trial, for stopping payment on a check with intent to defraud in violation of section 832.041(1), Florida Statutes (2002)....
This Florida statute resource is curated by Graham W. Syfert, Esq., a Jacksonville, Florida personal injury and workers' compensation attorney. For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.
