T.S.J., A CHILD, 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.
A juvenile's adjudication for petit theft was reversed because the State failed to present sufficient evidence at the close of its case-in-chief to establish that the necklace was stolen rather than purchased, and a defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal at that stage cannot be cured by evidence presented in the defendant's case.
A motion for judgment of acquittal made at the close of the State's case-in-chief must be granted if the State has not presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case, and the State cannot rely on evidence presented during the defendant's case to remedy deficiencies in its own case.
[1] A motion for judgment of acquittal made at the close of the State's case-in-chief is not waived by the defendant's subsequent introduction of evidence, and the State cann…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the State cannot avoid a motion for judgment of acquittal, made at the close of the State's case by relying on evidence presented in the defendant's case to establish an essential element of its case”
The court explained the proper standard for evaluating motions for judgment of acquittal at the close of the State's case-in-chief.
A juvenile was found in possession of a necklace that came from a store, but the State presented no evidence at the close of its case-in-chief to esta…
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 Petit Theft cases and more on FLexlaw
COWART, Judge.
The defendant was adjudicated a delinquent based upon a finding that he had committed petit theft. The evidence indicates that the defendant was in possession of a necklace that had come from a store. However, there was no evidence adduced in the State’s case1 to establish that the necklace was stolen rather than purchased. The motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of the State’s case should have been granted. The defendant’s adjudication of delinquency is reversed and the commitment based on that conviction is discharged.
REVERSED.
COBB and HARRIS, JJ., concur. . We acknowledge that the evidence presented in the defendant’s case after the denial of the defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal remedied the omissions in the State’s case so as to support a conviction. In considering a motion for judgment of acquittal made at the close of the State’s case, the question is whether the State has presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case. In the Interest of T.M.M., 560 So. 2d 805 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Williams v. State, 511 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). A defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal made at the close of the State’s case is not waived by the defendant's subsequent introduction of evidence. State v. Pennington, 534 So. 2d 393 (Fla.1988). Thus, the State cannot avoid a motion for judgment of acquittal, made at the close of the State’s case by relying on evidence presented in the defendant’s case to establish an essential element of its case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lord v. State, 667 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)…dgment of acquittal at the close of the state’s case4 because the state cannot rely on evidence admitted in the defendant’s case to supply missing elements in its initial presentation. State v. Pennington, 534 So. 2d 393 (Fla.1988); T.S.J. v. State, 605 So. 2d 1338, 1339 n. 1 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992). Second, if it appears that the state presented legally sufficient circumstantial evidence in its initial presentation to establish a prima facie case, then the evidence as a whole must be analyzed to determine whether…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Pennington, 534 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 1988)
- In the Interest of T.M.M., 560 So. 2d 805 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
- Pace v. Perry, 511 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)
- Williams v. State, 511 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)