From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

M.W. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Apr 24, 1992
596 So. 2d 534 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

Opinion

No. 91-1365.

April 24, 1992.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Seminole County; Leonard V. Wood, Judge.

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Lyle R. Hitchens, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and John W. Foster, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.


We agree with the defendant that the circumstantial evidence presented by the state on the grand theft count failed to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and will not support the conviction. However, the record supports the defendant's conviction for dealing in stolen property.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part.

GOSHORN, C.J., and COBB and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

M.W. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Apr 24, 1992
596 So. 2d 534 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)
Case details for

M.W. v. State

Case Details

Full title:M.W., A CHILD, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Apr 24, 1992

Citations

596 So. 2d 534 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

Citing Cases

Luscomb v. State

Because the circumstantial evidence presented by appellee fails to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of…