T.G.B., JR., A JUVENILE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The appellate court reversed a delinquency order, finding that the juvenile's due process rights were violated by the failure to appoint counsel for him at the delinquency proceedings.
The court held that the juvenile's due process rights were violated by the failure to appoint counsel to represent him in the delinquency proceedings.
A juvenile, accused of attempted robbery, appeared at a delinquency hearing without counsel and waived his right to counsel. The court proceeded to ad…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Intent To Commit An Offense Therein cases and more on FLexlaw
FERGUSON, Judge.
The trial court adjudicated the juvenile T.G.B. as delinquent based on a finding that he had committed arson, burglary and theft.
T.G.B. was one of five persons seen by Officer Dunlop fleeing a building shortly before a fire broke out and was one of four apprehended after a foot chase. Officer Pitts testified that nearly fifty persons hurriedly exited the building at the same time, carrying or dropping stolen merchandise.
There is no evidence that T.G.B. carried or dropped stolen merchandise when he exited the building. There is no evidence that he committed an arson nor that he aided or abetted another in the commission of that offense. The trial court could reasonably have found the direct and circumstantial evidence sufficient to establish that T.G.B. entered the structure with intent to commit an offense therein, to wit, theft, and that at the time of entry, the premises were not open to the public and T.G.B. had no invitation or license to enter. § 810.02, Fla.Stat. (1979). Intent may be shown by circumstantial evidence. R.A. v. State, 400 So. 2d 1059 (Fla.3d DCA).
Accordingly, we affirm the adjudication of delinquency but only as to the offense of burglary.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Tamer v. State, 510 So. 2d 933 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…. 1982), cert denied, 462 U.S. 1145,103 S.Ct. 3129, 77 L.Ed.2d 1379 (1983); Clark v. State, 363 So. 2d 331, 335 (Fla.1978); Weeks v. State, 492 So. 2d 719, 721 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Blair v. State, 481 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); T.G.B. v. State, 405 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Therefore the judgment of conviction is affirmed. Affirmed. . This court previously reversed an order granting Tamer's motion to suppress certain physical evidence relative to the instant prosecution. State v. Tamer, 449 S…
-
In the Interest of M.P. v. State, 596 So. 2d 170 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. State v. Law, 559 So. 2d 187 (Fla.1989); T.G.B. v. State, 405 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); R.A. v. State, 400 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 407 So. 2d 1105 (Fla.1981); Jones v. State, 192 So. 2d 285 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966).…
Authorities Cited
- R. A. v. State, 400 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)