Amendments to 831.02

1. King v. State

   339 So. 2d 172 (Fla. 1976)   Cited 21 times

   "We here consider the issue of whether there exists under Florida law the offense of attempted uttering of a forged instrument. Appellant, defendant below, was charged with and convicted of uttering a forged instrument as defined by F.S. 831.02. He argued unsuccessfully in the court below that the jury should be instructed as to a lesser included offense of attempted uttering, pursuant to Rule 3.510, RCrP.
2. Case v. Eslinger

   555 F.3d 1317 (11th Cir. 2009)   Cited 546 times   1 Legal Analyses

   • Motion for summary judgment
   4 more...

   On June 17, 2002, Officer Davis arrested Case, without a warrant, and seized several pieces of property from Case's place of business, including six aluminum rims. Case was charged with passing a forged or altered instrument, Fla. Stat. § 831.02, larceny of more than $300 but less than $2000, id. § 812.014, and as an accessory after the fact, id. § 777.03.

   PAGE 1324
3. Rummel v. Estelle

   445 U.S. 263 (1980)   Cited 2,575 times   2 Legal Analyses

   3 more...

   (1974) (fine or up to 7 years); D.C. Code § 22-1401 (1973) (1 to 10 years); Fla. Stat. §§ 831.01, 831.02 (1965) (fine or up to 10 years); Ga. Code Ann. § 26-1701 (1977) (1 to 10 years); Haw. Rev. Stat.

4. Walker v. U.S. Attorney Gen.

   783 F.3d 1226 (11th Cir. 2015)   Cited 9 times

   Walker is removable if he committed an “aggravated felony,” id. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii), which includes offenses that “involve[ ] fraud or deceit in which the loss to the victim or victims exceeds $10,000,” id. § 1101(a)(43)(M)(i). Walker does not contest that he was convicted of violating section 831.02 of the Florida Statutes, or that one of those convictions involved an amount greater than $10,000. Accordingly, the only question is whether a violation of section 831.02 is an “offense that ... involves fraud or deceit,” 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(M)(i). We hold that it is.

   PAGE 1228
5. Linn v. State

   921 So. 2d 830 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 5 times

   Linn was charged by information with uttering a forged instrument, in contravention of section 831.02, Florida Statutes (2004). The State alleged Linn attempted to cash a forged check for $376.50, drawn from the account of Lester Wagler.

   PAGE 832
6. Grievance Comm. for the Tenth Judicial Dist. v. Barisic (In re Barisic)

   110 A.D.3d 84 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)   Cited 5 times

   On December 1, 2006, the respondent pleaded guilty in the Circuit Court for the Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Miami–Dade County, Florida, to two counts of grand theft in the first degree, a felony in violation of Florida Statutes Annotated § 812.014(2)(a). On March 1, 2012, the respondent pleaded guilty in the Circuit Court for the Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Miami–Dade County, Florida, to five counts of uttering a forged instrument, a felony in violation of Florida Statutes Annotated § 831.02.
7. Glass v. State

   556 So. 2d 465 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)   Cited 20 times

   Defendant Michael Glass appeals the sentences imposed upon his violation of probation. The court ordered him to serve concurrent sentences of 30 months in prison and 5 years' probation, a total sanction of 7 1/2 years, for two third-degree felony convictions. After being initially charged, he pleaded guilty to a one-count information charging forgery of a check in the amount of $12.11 in violation of section 831.01, Florida Statutes (case no. 88-134), and to a second information charging four counts of uttering a forged instrument in violation of section 831.02, Florida Statutes, involving checks in the amounts of $25.00, $20.00, $23.00, and $22.00, respectively (case no. 88-138). Glass was placed on probation with the condition that he "receive a guidelines sentence" and "pay restitution on all checks, filed and not filed, [and] if defendant violates probation, state will file all unfiled charges."
8. Ellis v. Warner

   CASE NO. 15-10134-CIV-GOODMAN (S.D. Fla. Feb. 16, 2017)   Cited 3 times

   • Motion to dismiss
   9 more...

   Section 831.02 states that "[w]hoever utters and publishes as true a false, forged or altered record, deed, instrument or other writing mentioned in § 831.01 [such as a will] knowing the same to be false, altered, forged or counterfeited, with intent to injure or defraud any person, shall be guilty of a felony of the third degree." Fla. Stat. § 831.02.

   PAGE 50
9. Parker v. State

   658 So. 2d 1105 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)   Cited 3 times

   • Motion to dismiss

   This is an appeal by the defendant John M. Parker from a final judgment of conviction and sentence for uttering a forged instrument [§ 831.02, Fla. Stat. (1991)] imposed below upon a nolo contendere plea. In the trial court, the defendant expressly reserved for appeal the dispositive issue of whether the trial court erred in denying the defendant's sworn motion to dismiss filed pursuant to Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.190(c)(4). We conclude that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to dismiss and affirm.
10. State v. Friedman

    533 So. 2d 309 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

    We agree with the trial court that section 831.02 proscribes uttering only such records and documents as are mentioned in section 831.01, and that the state's information does not charge an offense under section 831.02. The allegation that appellee uttered an altered record relates to a private academic transcript, which is neither a public record nor other document identified in section 831.01. Uttering such a transcript is therefore not a violation of section 831.02, as strictly construed in pari materia with section 831.01. The state's information was properly dismissed.