H.M., A JUVENILE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
H.M., A JUVENILE, APPELLANT,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
802 So. 2d 1185
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2002)
Caution
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The respondent, H.M., appeals from his adjudication of delinquency for burglary. As the State properly concedes, the trial court should have granted the respondent’s motion for judgment of acquittal with respect to the burglary count where there was no evidence refuting his reasonable hypothesis of innocence that he was only an onlooker or mere witness to a crime. J.W. v. State, 467 So. 2d 796, 797 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)(“Presence at the scene of the offense and flight from the scene is legally insufficient to establish appellant’s guilt as an aider and abettor.”). Instead, as the parties acknowledged at oral argument, the trial court should have entered an adjudication of delinquency for trespass.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Warmington v. State, 149 So. 3d 648 (Fla. 2014)…ngton asserted that he was actually innocent, the State was required under Florida law to refute any reasonable hypothesis of his innocence — which it did, partly by way of the testimony it elicited from Warmington.3 But see generally H.M. v. State, 802 So. 2d 1185 (Fla. 3d DCÁ 2002) (“[T]he trial court should have granted the respondent’s motion for judgment of acquittal with respect to the burglary count where there was no evidence refuting his reasonable hypothesis of innocence that he was only an onlooker…
-
F.D. v. State, 927 So. 2d 936 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…fficient as a matter of law. In support of this proposition, F.D. relies on R.M. v. State, 450 So. 2d 897 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), E.L.S. v. State, 547 So. 2d 298 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), R.A.L. v. State, 402 So. 2d 1337 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), and H.M. v. State, 802 So. 2d 1185 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). We conclude, however, that F.D.’s reliance on these cases is misplaced. H.M. was a circumstantial evidence case. We have already noted that this case is not. We, therefore, find that H.M. is inapplicable to our analysis in the i…
-
Rainey v. State, 938 So. 2d 632 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…d 684 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). [*634] On September 6, 2001, Rainey filed his first 3.850 motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. That motion was denied on October 23, 2001, and the order denying relief was affirmed on appeal. Rainey v. State, 802 So. 2d 1185 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). On July 3, 2003, he filed a 3.800(a) motion to correct sentence, which was denied on September 15, 2003. Rainey filed this second 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief based on a claim of newly discovered evidence. Dr. Shashi…
Authorities Cited
- J.W. v. State, 467 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)