MALIK MILLS vs THE STATE OF FLORIDA
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
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
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
