Malik Mills v. the State of Florida
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledSeptember 30, 2020
Docket3D18-1223
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed September 30, 2020.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D18-1223
Lower Tribunal No. 13-19313C
________________
Malik Mills,
Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Lisa S. Walsh,
Judge.
Stephan Lopez Law Firm, LLC, and Stephan Lopez, for appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Asad Ali, Assistant Attorney General,
for appellee.
Before EMAS, C.J., and LINDSEY and GORDO, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Schramm v. State, 374 So. 2d 1043, 1044 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
(holding: “A person is an accessory after the fact where he gives an offender any
aid, knowing that he committed a felony with the intent that he shall avoid or escape
detection, arrest, trial, or punishment”); Melahn v. State, 843 So. 2d 929, 930 (Fla.
5th DCA 2003) (observing: “Certain falsehoods told to an officer seeking
information, which go beyond merely disavowing or refusing to cooperate with an
investigation, may support a conviction for accessory after the fact”) (citations
omitted). See also Bowen v. State, 791 So. 2d 44, 53 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)(observing:
“As with the element of knowledge, proof of the defendant's intent is often supported
only by circumstantial evidence, which must be sufficient to exclude a reasonable
hypothesis of innocence. In addition, the type of aid given often provides the best
circumstantial evidence of intent. That is, the greater the aid and the greater the
potential it had to assist the felon, the more likely it was done with the requisite
intent”) (citations omitted).
2