| Probable cause affidavit: |
SUBMITTED BY: FERGUSON, ROBERT 0505 (AR12-2099) DID UNLAWFULLY ENTER OR REMAIN IN A CERTAIN OCCUPIED STRUCTURE OR CURTILAGE THEREOF, TO-WIT: A RESIDENCE, LOCATED AT 767 NORTHEAST 6TH STREET, IN THE COUNTY AND STATE AFORESAID, THE PROPERTY OF THE VICTIM, WITHOUT SAID PERSON'S CONSENT, WITH THE INTENT TO COMMIT AN OFFENSE THEREIN, TO-WIT: PETIT THEFT, IN VIOLATION OF FLORIDA STATE STATUTE 812.014(3)(A); AND DID UNLAWFULLY AND KNOWINGLY OBTAIN OR USE, OR ENDEAVOR TO OBTAIN OR USE THE PROPERTY OF THE VICTIM TO WIT: MONEY, SAID PROPERTY BEING OF A VALUE OF $51.00 WITH THE INTENT TO EITHER TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY DEPRIVE THE VICTIM OF A RIGHT TO THE PROPERTY OR A BENEFIT THEREOF, OR DID APPROPRIATE THE SAID PROPERTY TO HIS OWN USE OR THE USE OF ANY PERSON NOT ENTITLED THERETO, IN VIOLATION OF FLORIDA STATE STATUTES 812.014(1) and 812.014(3)(a). ON 072312, I RESPONDED TO 767 NORTHEAST 6TH STREET IN REFERENCE TO A BURGLARY THAT HAD ALREADY OCCURRED. UPON MY ARRIVAL, I MADE CONTACT WITH THE VICTIM, MS COURTNEY TAYLOR, WHO ADVISED THAT A SHORT TIME AFTER WAKING UP SHE OBSERVED THAT SHE HAD SEVERAL TEXT MESSAGES FROM THE DEFENDANT, MR ROBERT PAINE, ON HER CELL PHONE. SHE READ THE TEXT MESSAGES AND IN THEM THE DEFENDANT WAS LOOKING FOR SHOES FOR THEIR CHILD THAT THEY HAVE IN COMMON. SHE SAID THAT WHEN SHE WENT INTO THE LIVING ROOM SHE NOTICED THE SHOES HAD BEEN TAKEN AND SHE ALSO NOTICED HER PURSE HAD BEEN MOVED FROM WHERE SHE HAD LEFT IT, WHICH WAS IN THE DOORWAY TO HER BEDROOM WHERE SHE WAS SLEEPING. SHE ADVISED THAT AFTER LOOKING INSIDE HER PURSE, SHE NOTICED THAT SHE WAS MISSING APPROXIMATELY $51.00 FROM HER WALLET. SHE FURTHER STATED THAT AT NO TIME HAS MR PAINE HAD PERMISSION TO ENTER HER RESIDENCE WITHOUT FIRST BEING GIVEN CONSENT. SHE THEN CALLED HER ROOMMATE, MS LAUREN OGEN. MS OGEN SAID THAT SHE HAD BEEN IN CONTACT WITH MR PAINE’S MOTHER AT APPROXIMATELY 0850 HOURS, AND THAT SHE TOLD MS PAINE THAT THE VICTIM WAS AT HOME SLEEPING AND THAT THEY COULD POSSIBLY OBTAIN SHOES FROM THE VICTIM. MS OGEN ADVISED THAT AT NO TIME DID SHE GIVE PERMISSION TO MR PAINE TO ENTER THE RESIDENCE. WHILE AT THE RESIDENCE SPEAKING WITH THE VICTIM, THE DEFENDANT CALLED THE VICTIM’S CELL PHONE, AT WHICH TIME, I ANSWERED THE PHONE. I ADVISED THE DEFENDANT WHO I WAS AND THAT I NEEDED TO SPEAK WITH HIM. THE DEFENDANT SAID THAT HE WOULD BE EN ROUTE TO THE VICTIM’S ADDRESS IN ORDER TO SPEAK WITH ME. AFTER WAITING APPROXIMATELY 30 MINUTES THE DEFENDANT DID NOT SHOW UP. I THEN RESPONDED TO THE DEFENDANT’S ADDRESS. UPON ARRIVAL AT 9868 WEST ARMS DRIVE, I MADE CONTACT WITH THE DEFENDANT’S MOTHER, MS SUSAN PAINE. I TOLD MS PAINE WHY I WAS AT THE RESIDENCE AND ASKED HER WHAT HAD OCCURRED EARLIER IN THE DAY. MS PAINE ADVISED THAT SHE DROVE THE DEFENDANT TO THE VICTIM’S ADDRESS. UPON ARRIVAL, BOTH SHE AND THE DEFENDANT APPROACHED THE DOOR. WHEN THERE WAS NO ANSWER AT THE DOOR SHE OPENED THE DOOR, REACHED IN, AND GRABBED THE CHILD’S SHOES AND THEN THEY BOTH LEFT THE RESIDENCE. WHILE ON SCENE, I NOTICED THE VICTIM’S DOOR WAS BROKEN AND WOULD ONLY OPEN APPROXIMATELY A FOOT AND A HALF. AFTER HAVING MS PAINE DEMONSTRATE HOW SHE OPENED THE DOOR AND WHERE THE SHOES WERE LOCATED I TOLD HER THAT HER STORY COULD NOT BE TRUE. SHE THEN RECANTED HER INITIAL STATEMENT AND STATED SHE DID NOT GO UP TO THE DOOR WITH THE DEFENDANT AND THAT THE DEFENDANT ENTERED THE RESIDENCE ALONE. I ADVISED MS PAINE THAT WHEN HER SON RETURNED TO THE RESIDENCE THAT I NEEDED TO SPEAK WITH HIM AND THAT HE COULD CALL AT ANY TIME. ON 072412 AT APPROXIMATELY 0615 HOURS, I RESPONDED BACK TO 9868 WEST ARMS DRIVE WHERE I WAS ABLE TO MAKE CONTACT WITH THE DEFENDANT. I TOLD THE DEFENDANT WHY I WAS THERE AND READ THE DEFENDANT HIS MIRANDA WARNING VIA PREPRINTED CARD. THE DEFENDANT ADVISED HE UNDERSTOOD HIS RIGHTS AND THAT HE WISHED TO SPEAK WITH ME. I ASKED THE DEFENDANT WHAT HAD OCCURRED, TO WHICH HE STATED THAT UPON ARRIVAL AT THE VICTIM’S ADDRESS HE OPENED UP THE DOOR, REACHED IN, GRABBED THE SHOES, AND LEFT. AFTER HAVING HIM DEMONSTRATE HOW HE DID THIS, I ADVISED HIM THAT HIS STORY COULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED THE WAY HE SAID IT HAD BECAUSE OF THE DOOR NOT BEING ABLE TO OPEN PROPERLY. I PLACED THE DEFENDANT IN HANDCUFFS BEHIND HIS BACK AND WHILE DOUBLE LOCKING THE HANDCUFFS, THE DEFENDANT STATED, “WHAT IF I GAVE HER HER MONEY BACK.” I ADVISED THE DEFENDANT THAT I KNEW HE HAD NOT BEEN HONEST WITH ME AND THAT I WOULD LISTEN IF HE WANTED TO TELL ME WHAT REALLY HAPPENED. HE SAID THAT HE DID IN FACT TAKE THE VICTIM’S MONEY AND THAT IT WAS IN HIS PANTS POCKET THAT WAS ON THE FLOOR. THE DEFENDANT TOLD ME WHICH PAIR OF PANTS IT WAS IN AND SAID THAT I COULD RETRIEVE IT. HE FURTHER ADVISED THAT WHEN HE RESPONDED TO THE VICTIM’S ADDRESS, HE INITIALLY KNOCKED, HOWEVER, WHEN THERE WAS NO ANSWER HE WENT IN. HE RETRIEVED THE CHILD’S SHOES, WHICH WERE JUST INSIDE THE RESIDENCE AND HE THEN PROCEEDED INTO THE BEDROOM DOORWAY WHERE THE VICTIM WAS SLEEPING. HE SAW THE VICTIM’S PURSE SITTING ON THE GROUND, AT WHICH TIME, HE WENT THROUGH IT AND REMOVED THE MONEY. THE DEFENDANT PROVIDED ME WITH $51.00 THAT HE ADVISED HE HAD TAKEN FROM THE VICTIM’S PURSE. THE DEFENDANT FURTHER ADVISED THAT AFTER KNOCKING ON THE DOOR AND NOT GETTING AN ANSWER HE KNEW IT WAS NOT RIGHT FOR HIM TO GO IN, HOWEVER, HE DID SO ANYWAYS. THE DEFENDANT WAS THEN PLACED IN THE REAR SEAT OF MY PATROL VEHICLE AND TRANSPORTED TO THE CITRUS COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY WHERE HE WAS CHARGED WITH ONE COUNT OF BURGLARY TO AN OCCUPIED DWELLING AND PETIT THEFT. TOTAL BOND SET AT $15,250.00. A PROPERTY RECEIPT WAS FILLED OUT AND SIGNED BY THE DEFENDANT AND THE MONEY WAS RETURNED TO THE VICTIM. |
