J.Y., A JUVENILE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 reversed a juvenile's burglary conviction because the state failed to prove the defendant had intent to commit a crime in the vehicle, which is an essential element of burglary.
Burglary of a conveyance requires proof of intent to commit a crime inside the vehicle, and absent such evidence, the conviction must be reversed.
[1] Burglary of a conveyance requires proof that the defendant entered the conveyance with intent to commit a crime therein; mere observation of leaning into a vehicle withou…
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 intelligenceA bystander observed J.Y. leaning into a vehicle. The state charged J.Y. with burglary of a conveyance but presented no evidence of intent to commit a…
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 Lack Of Consent cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
J.Y., a juvenile, appeals an adjudication of delinquency of burglary of a conveyance. We reverse.
The trial court erred in finding J.Y. guilty of the burglary charge. The evidence was insufficient to establish the crime of burglary of a conveyance: despite a bystander’s observation of J.Y. leaning into a vehicle, the state did not present any evidence that J.Y. had the intent to commit a crime in the vehicle. § 810.02(1), Fla. Stat. (1995); see K.H. v. State, 620 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)(absent proof of intent to commit offense in dwelling burglary not established); B.D. v. State, 412 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)(crime of burglary not proven in absence of evidence of intent). Moreover, the state did not establish that J.Y.’s behavior constituted trespass in a conveyance, a lesser included offense of burglary, State v. G.C., 572 So. 2d 1380 (Fla.1991); D.L. v. State, 567 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990), as the state presented no proof in this case to demonstrate lack of consent, an element of the offense of trespass. § 810.08(1), Fla. Stat. (1995); Jones v. State, 666 So. 2d 960, 964 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996).
Based on the foregoing, we reverse the adjudication and remand for discharge of the juvenile.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. G.C., 572 So. 2d 1380 (Fla. 1991)
- Jones v. State, 666 So. 2d 960 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
- B. D. v. State, 412 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- Receveur v. State, 567 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
- K.H. v. State, 620 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)