EASTON D. MASSEY, APPELLANT,
v.
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 court held that the victim's testimony regarding the bicycle's value, including purchase price and improvements, was sufficient to establish fair market value for grand theft charges, but the assessment of court costs was improper without notice and a hearing.
The defendant was convicted of burglary and grand theft after a victim observed him stealing a bicycle. The victim testified to the bicycle's original…
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 Burglary Of A Structure cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendant/appellant, Easton Massey, appeals from convictions for burglary of a structure and grand theft. We affirm in part and reverse in part. The record shows that Jerry Pietila, the victim of the burglary, observed the defendant taking his (Pietila’s) bicycle from a tool shed. At the trial Pietila testified that the value of the bicycle was $419.95 when he bought it. Massey argues on appeal that the trial court should have granted his motion for judgment of acquittal because the state failed to show the value of the property taken.1 Massey argues that the evidence of the original purchase price of the bike is not sufficient by itself to establish the fair market value.
The record shows that Pietila not only testified as to the value of the bicycle when he purchased it, he also testified as to his costs expended on improving the bicycle and its condition at the time of the theft. The value of an object can be established by the testimony of the property’s owner if the owner can be said to have knowledge of the property. Taylor v. State, 425 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983.) Pietila demonstrated that he had knowledge of the property and that in his opinion the bicycle was worth “at least $650.”
Massey also argues that the trial court erred in assessing court costs against him without notice and a hearing. We agree and reverse the imposition of costs. See Mays v. State, 519 So. 2d 618 (Fla.1988); Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla.1984).
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.
ANSTEAD and WARNER, JJ., and WALDEN, JAMES H., (Retired) Associate Judge, concur. . Section 812.014(2)(c)(1) requires that the value of the property be at least $300 at the time of the offense.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
I.T. v. State, 796 So. 2d 1220 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…fy as to the market value of the items at the time of the theft. See Negron v. State, 306 So. 2d 104, 108 (Fla.1974)(state must establish value at the time of the theft); Jones v. State, 616 So. 2d 186 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); see e.g., Massey v. State, 575 So. 2d 1372, 1373 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)(owner demonstrated cost of stolen bicycle by testifying as to the purchase price and the costs expended on improving the bicycle and its condition at the time of the theft); see also Randolph v. State, 608 So. 2d 573 (Fla.…
-
Wingfield v. State, 751 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…testimony as to the amount of damages. The State argues that the police officer could competently testify as to the damages to the police car, just as a property owner can testify about the value of his or her property. See, e.g., Massey v. State, 575 So. 2d 1372, 1373 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). We disagree. An officer who uses a patrol car does not necessarily have the same knowledge of the vehicle’s value as an owner who purchases or maintains a vehicle. The State failed to show that these officers had any parti…
-
Hayward Anderson v. State, 739 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…r dire. This provided Anderson with the ability to pace the timing of his examination and make tactical decisions regarding what questions to ask. See Rodriguez, 675 So. 2d at 191. As to the other issues raised, we also affirm. See Massey v. State, 575 So. 2d 1372 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). STEVENSON and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.…
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
- Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 1984)
- Mays v. State, 519 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 1988)
- Taylor v. State, 425 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)