Arturo Hernandez-Paz v. State of Florida
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledApril 7, 2020
Docket1D19-1362
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
No. 1D19-1362
_____________________________
ARTURO HERNANDEZ-PAZ,
Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
_____________________________
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County.
Robert E. Long, Judge.
April 7, 2020
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Arturo Hernandez-Paz, appeals his conviction for
attempted sexual battery and raises two issues. We reject
Appellant’s first argument that the trial court erred in denying his
motion for judgment of acquittal for the reasons that follow. We
affirm as to the second issue without discussion.
We review the trial court’s denial of a motion for judgment of
acquittal de novo to determine whether the evidence is legally
sufficient to sustain a conviction. Kemp v. State, 166 So. 3d 213,
216 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). In doing so, we must consider the
evidence and all reasonable inferences therefrom in a light most
favorable to the State. Id.
Viewed in the light most favorable to the State, the evidence
at trial showed the following. Appellant returned to the victim’s
apartment by himself for a tool he claimed to have left there earlier
while his crew was replacing the flooring. Appellant asked to look
for the tool in the victim’s bedroom, and while they were both in
there, he repeatedly called her beautiful and complimented her
body. He then asked her if she knew any women who would be
interested in having sex with him, reassuring her that he had
money and could pay for “whatever he needs to happen.” She kept
telling him that she did not know any such women and she was
not interested and that her boyfriend would be home soon. While
standing in a manner that he was blocking her only way out of the
bedroom, Appellant told the victim that they “can do something
quick right now, that no one had to know about what [they] had to
do right then and there,” and he proceeded to try to reach under
her pajama shorts and grab her vagina. She slapped his hand
away before he could make physical contact, and she told him no.
Appellant, however, did not cease his sexual advances at that
point. Cf. Rogers v. State, 660 So. 2d 237, 238–41 (Fla. 1995)
(holding that the evidence did not support a conviction for
attempted sexual battery where the appellant told the victim to
take off her clothes and grabbed her breast when she refused, and
he stopped when she asked him not to do that and made no further
attempt to touch her, despite holding her and her companion at
gunpoint in a car).
Instead of stopping when the victim unambiguously refused
his sexual advances by slapping his hand away and telling him no,
Appellant forcibly continued his assault by immediately putting
her in a tight bear hug, with one arm around her waist and on her
buttocks and the other hand grabbing her breasts. He then lifted
her up and tried to swing her over to the bed that was right next
to them. Nervous about being placed on the bed, the victim pushed
Appellant off as hard as she could and ran out of the bedroom to
get her cell phone. Appellant terminated his attempt only then,
after the victim got away from him. See Gudinas v. State, 693 So.
2d 953, 962 (Fla. 1997) (affirming the appellant’s conviction for
attempted sexually battery where he followed the victim and tried
to forcibly enter her car on three separate occasions, once while
yelling, “I want to f___ you,” and he ceased his attempt only when
she laid on the horn, and distinguishing Rogers because “Rogers
2
ceased his advances after simply being asked to stop, although he
held the two people at gunpoint with both powerless to stop him”);
see also Geldreich v. State, 763 So. 2d 1114, 1118–19 (Fla. 4th DCA
1999) (affirming the denial of the appellant’s motion for judgment
of acquittal on the charge of attempted sexual battery with force
where he forcibly carried the victim to the parking lot after she
declined his invitation to go to his apartment, he threw her down,
straddled her, and began to take her blouse off, and she was able
to flee when someone went to see if everything was okay upon
hearing her screams, and explaining that “[u]nlike Rogers . . .,
where the defendant ceased his sexual advances when the victim
asked him to stop, Geldreich forcibly continued his assault”).
Thus, we find that the trial court properly denied Appellant’s
motion for judgment of acquittal as there was competent,
substantial evidence to support a verdict finding him guilty of
attempted sexual battery.
Therefore, we affirm Appellant’s conviction.
AFFIRMED.
RAY, C.J., and LEWIS and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and
authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
9.331.
_____________________________
Terry P. Roberts of Law Office of Terry P. Roberts, Tallahassee;
Mark V. Murray of Law Office of Mark V. Murray, Tallahassee, for
Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Quentin Humphrey,
Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
3