DEOGRACIA REYNOSO, 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 trial court erred in denying the motion for judgment of acquittal because the state failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's fingerprints were found on the inside of the window.
The defendant was charged with burglary of his former place of employment. Fingerprints belonging to the defendant were found on a broken window used …
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 Judgment Of Acquittal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Deogracia Reynoso, seeks reversal of his conviction of burglary and sentence of one year probation. The thrust of his argument is that the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of the state’s case and it further erred in imposing a sentence of one year probation. We reverse on both points.
Deogracia was charged with burglarizing his former place of employment several months after he had been discharged. The evidence adduced by the state was in great measure circumstantial. The most damning evidence however was fingerprints found on a broken window where entry had been effected. The fingerprints belonged to Deogracia. Furthermore, the evidence also showed that the inside of the window had been tinted after Deogracia’s departure. Be that as it may, the evidence fails to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the prints were found on the inside of the window as opposed to the outside thereof. This is vital to proving a circumstantial evidence case on this record.
Accordingly, we hold that the trial court erred in denying Deogracia’s motion for a judgment of acquittal. We therefore reverse the judgment and sentence and remand with directions to discharge appellant.
GLICKSTEIN and FARMER, JJ., and DOWNEY, JAMES C., Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
LEE v. State, 640 So. 2d 126 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…77). Proof that the defendant’s fingerprint was on the broken window pane is not sufficient evidence of guilt because the expert witness was unable to exclude the possibility the fingerprint was placed on the outside of the window. Reynoso v. State, 621 So. 2d 558 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); State v. Hayes, 333 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976). The evidence revealed that the defendant was in possession of an air conditioner and a VCR, but the inference that could be drawn from this evidence is also insufficient. There…