From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Z.S. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
May 22, 1991
579 So. 2d 865 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Opinion

No. 89-02921.

May 22, 1991.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Hendry County, Kirby Sullivan, Acting J.

Lawrence D. Shearer of McDonald Shearer, Lakeland, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Donna A. Provonsha, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.


Z.S., a juvenile, challenges an order adjudicating him delinquent based on the trial judge's finding that he committed grand theft of a motor vehicle, a violation of section 812.014, Florida Statutes (1989). Z.S. argues the court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal. We agree.

The evidence at the adjudicatory hearing revealed that on the evening of June 26, 1989, Sgt. Alan Howard found a dark maroon 1989 Jeep Cherokee alongside a roadway. The vehicle was identified as one that had been stolen. About three and one-half hours later Howard arrested Z.S., a black male whom he had seen pumping gas into a black Jeep Cherokee at a Circle K store earlier that evening. A clerk from Circle K testified that "a bunch of boys" had been at the store's gasoline pumps on that same evening. They arrived in two vehicles, one of which she described as a "black Jeep, Bronco-type vehicle." She described two of the youths, one white and one black, who came into the store to pay for the gas. She could not, however, identify Z.S. as the black male who came into the store.

On appeal, Z.S. posits that the state's case is based on an inference of guilt that can arise from an accused's possession of recently stolen property. He points out, however, that there was no evidence that he operated, was a passenger in, or exercised any control over the vehicle in question. He argues that the state failed to prove possession and the trial court should have granted his motion for a judgment of acquittal. The state counters that Sgt. Howard's testimony identifying Z.S. as the person who had pumped gasoline into the stolen vehicle is sufficient to link him with the offense.

Section 812.014, Florida Statutes (1989), defines theft as follows:
1) A person is guilty of theft if he knowingly obtains or uses, or endeavors to obtain or to use, the property of another with intent to, either temporarily or permanently:
(a) Deprive the other person of a right to the property or a benefit therefrom.
(b) Appropriate the property to his own use or to the use of any person not entitled thereto.

Laying aside a conflict in the evidence as to the color of the vehicle in question, there was insufficient evidence to establish that Z.S. was guilty of theft of the vehicle. The most the evidence showed was that Z.S. pumped gas into a stolen Jeep. Consequently, there was no proof of either possession or intent. See A.E. v. State, 549 So.2d 774 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); E.L.S. v. State, 547 So.2d 298 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).

Accordingly, we reverse and order Z.S. discharged.

LEHAN and HALL, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Z.S. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
May 22, 1991
579 So. 2d 865 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)
Case details for

Z.S. v. State

Case Details

Full title:Z.S., APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: May 22, 1991

Citations

579 So. 2d 865 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Citing Cases

State v. E.A

We affirm the trial court's order granting E.A.'s sworn motion to dismiss. Contrary to the state's position,…

Adams v. State

"Proof of possession of property recently stolen, unless satisfactorily explained, gives rise to an inference…