THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
JAN ANTHONY FOX, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Possession Of Recently Stolen Property cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Judge.
After conducting the hearing on the defendant’s sworn motions to dismiss we required in Fox v. State, 384 So. 2d 226 (Fla.3d DCA 1980), review denied, 392 So. 2d 1379 (Fla.1980), the trial judge granted the motions. This was error. The conflicting and inherently suspect nature of the defendant’s multiple explanations of his possession of recently stolen property, together with the fact that he was found with additional stolen items, presented what was clearly a jury question of his guilt. Section 812.-022(2), Florida Statutes (1979); State v. Graham, 238 So. 2d 618 (Fla.1970); McWhirter v. State, 325 So. 2d 463 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976), cert. denied, 336 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 1976); Burroughs v. State, 221 So. 2d 159 (Fla.2d DCA 1969); Borghese v. State, 158 So. 2d 785 (Fla.3d DCA 1963); compare, R. A. L. v. State, 402 So. 2d 1337 (Fla.3d DCA 1981); A. R. v. State, 393 So. 2d 1174 (Fla.3d DCA 1981).
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
P.N. v. State, 443 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…created an issue for the trier of fact as to whether his possession of the moped had been satisfactorily explained so as to dissipate the statutory presumption. See State v. Graham, 238 So. 2d 618 (Fla.1970). The case is controlled by State v. Fox, 404 So. 2d 799 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), and cases cited, not R.A.L. v. State, 402 So. 2d 1337 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981) or A.R. v. State, 393 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Furthermore, since credibility is always, and particularly in this area, see State v. Young, 217 So. 2…
-
R.D.S. v. State, 446 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)…ony was unworthy of belief and thus that the legislatively-imposed inference of guilt had not been overcome. See State v. Graham, 238 So. 2d 618 (Fla.1970). I believe therefore that P.N. v. State, 443 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), and State v. Fox, 404 So. 2d 799 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), rather than R.A.L., R.M., and A.R., control. I would affirm.…
-
Hezekiah Mack v. State, 436 So. 2d 1083 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See State v. Fox, 404 So. 2d 799 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Hudson v. State, 395 So. 2d 228 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Cioeta v. State, 367 So. 2d 718 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Graham, 238 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 1970)
- Burroughs v. State, 221 So. 2d 159 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969)
- A. R. v. State, 393 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- R. A. L. v. State, 402 So. 2d 1337 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Rodriguez v. Rattan, 402 So. 2d 1337 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Benny John Borghese v. State, 158 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)
- Emmitt v. McWHIRTER, 325 So. 2d 463 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)
- FOX v. State, 384 So. 2d 226 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)