RAY R. HERNANDEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
BARBARA HERNANDEZ, APPELLEE
RAY R. HERNANDEZ, APPELLANT,
BARBARA HERNANDEZ, APPELLEE
604 So. 2d 936
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1992)
Caution
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The appellee wife stipulates that there should be a new trial on all issues, which concession is well taken. See Petrucci v. Petrucci, 252 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971). The final judgment and post-judgment orders that are the subject of this appeal are reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial on all issues.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
D.L. v. State, 138 So. 3d 499 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)…s in a structure or conveyance.” Where, as here, the trespass involves a stolen vehicle, the State is required to prove the defendant’s knowledge of the vehicle’s stolen nature. E.A.B. v. State, 851 So. 2d 308, 310 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); J.D. v. State, 604 So. 2d 936, 937 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)(upholding a conviction for trespass when the trial court was entitled to believe based on the evidence that the defendant had knowledge the vehicle was stolen and willfully entered the vehicle with that knowledge). The State…
-
E.A.B. v. State, 851 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…for trespass in an occupied conveyance because the State only proved the vehicle had been stolen, the defendant was a passenger in the vehicle, and there was no evidence the defendant knew or should have known the vehicle was stolen); J.D. v. State, 604 So. 2d 936, 937 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) (concluding that the defendant’s entry into a vehicle with visible damage to the ignition, radio, and speakers, and his lending of his keys to the driver to put in the ignition so that the stolen character of the vehicle migh…
-
P.W. v. State, 730 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)…subsequently found to be a passenger in the vehicle. There was no indication that P.W. knew or should have known that the vehicle was stolen. The ignition had not been punched out and the radio and speakers had not been removed as in J.D. v. State, 604 So. 2d 936 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). And neither the rear window nor the steering column had been broken as in M.F. v. State, 562 So. 2d 724 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). The trial court’s reliance on State v. G.C., 572 So. 2d 1380 (Fla.1991), is misplaced. In G.C., as to th…
Authorities Cited
- Ross v. State, 252 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)
- Emilie S. Petrucci v. Petrucci, 252 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)