Flores v. State

In Flores v. State, 853 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003), the defendant demanded money during a robbery of a hair salon, stole the owner's purse and the purses of her patrons, locked the owner and the patrons in the salon bathroom and stole the owner's car. Id. at 567. On appeal, the Third District found that the "theft of the victim's car was a fortuitous event occasioned only upon the defendant's . . . discovery of the car keys in the victim's purse as he searched for money," which he initially demanded upon entering the salon. Id. at 570 n.5. The court concluded that the use of force, violence, assault or putting in fear was only used by Flores during the course of the robbery of the purse, not the taking of the motor vehicle. Id. at 570. The Third District found it to be persuasive that the victim "was most likely unaware of the theft of her car due to her confinement in the bathroom." Id. at 570. The Third District reversed the defendant's conviction, reducing the defendant's carjacking charge to grand theft of an automobile. Id. at 570.