E.J.K., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
FRANK, Judge.
Although the record in this matter may be susceptible of a determination that E.J.K. acted in self-defense, we are precluded from passing upon the single question before us whether the trial court erred in finding the evidence sufficient to convict E.J.K. of aggravated battery. The record does not disclose either a motion for judgment of acquittal or a motion for a new trial. Either motion would have accorded the trial court an opportunity to test the sufficiency of the evidence and preserved the contention for appellate consideration. Pursuant to State v. Barber, 301 So. 2d 7 (Fla.1974), however, we are foreclosed from reviewing the evidence. See also Crenshaw v. State, 490 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Snyder v. Davis, 699 So. 2d 999 (Fla. 1997)…re, 75 Fla. 515, 522, 78 So. 605, 607 (1918), we stated: In this connection the word “heirs” means those who may under the laws of the State inherit from the owner of the homestead. Accord State Dep’t of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Trammell, 508 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). It is well established that heirs are determined after death, depending on who survives the testator. Williams v. Williams, 149 Fla. 454, 6 So. 2d 275 (1942); Pitts v. Pitts, 120 Fla. 363, 162 So. 708 (1935); Stone v. Citizens’…1 / 3
-
Bartelt v. Bartelt, 579 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)…es, § 11.2 (1988) (“The word ‘heirs’ does not always refer to the intestacy statutes. In Roman law, ‘heres’ meant either a person designated by will or someone who took upon intestacy.”); cf. Department of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Trammell, 508 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) (because decedent’s “good friend” not recognized as an heir under § 732.103, homestead property devised to that “good friend” was not exempt from forced sale by decedent’s creditors). In this case, the devisee was the son and nat…
-
Stanley v. State, 626 So. 2d 1004 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)…ove the amount of damage. Stanley, however, failed to preserve this issue because he never moved for a judgment of acquittal or filed a motion for new trial raising the sufficiency of the evidence on the criminal mischief count. See E.J.K. v. State, 508 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). He argues on appeal, relying on the ease of Nelson v. State, 543 So. 2d 1308 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989), that it was fundamental error because he stands convicted of a crime that never occurred. This case is distinguishable from Nelson.…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Barber, 301 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 1974)
- Crenshaw v. State, 490 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)