J.L.W., 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 held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting cross-examination and that a burglarized trailer was a 'structure' under statute.
Respondent was adjudicated delinquent and placed on community control. He appealed, arguing limitations on cross-examination and misclassification of …
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 Construction Of Statutes cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
J.L.W., the respondent below, appeals from an order of adjudication of delinquency and an order placing him on community control. We affirm.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting the respondent’s cross examination of a co-respondent who testified for the state. The respondent sought to show that the witness received favorable treatment from the state because only the respondent, and none of the other four boys who were arrested with him, was charged with burglary. Any error was harmless as a police officer already had testified that respondent was the only one of four boys who was charged with burglary, and the defense argued in closing that the respondent was the only boy charged with burglary.
We find no merit in the respondent’s second argument, that the trial court erred in concluding that the trailer he burglarized was a “structure” and not a “conveyance” within the meaning of section 810.011, Florida Statutes (2000). There was “not such variance [between the charge and the proof] here as could have misled respondent or subjected him to re-prosecution.” Dozier v. State, 662 So. 2d 382, 383 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995).
AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
D.O. v. State, 961 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)…nded lenient disposition, it is clear from this record that the trial court would have deviated upward for the four valid reasons, irrespective of the unsupported reason. The inclusion of an unsupported ground is harmless error. See J.L.W. v. State, 814 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (finding harmless error in trial court’s limiting juvenile’s cross-examination of co-respondent who testified for state in delinquency adjudication proceeding). Accordingly, we AFFIRM the disposition order. BARFIELD and ROBERTS,…
-
McPHEARSON v. State, 997 So. 2d 1207 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…WELLS, J. Affirmed. See J.L.W. v. State, 814 So. 2d 1223, 1224 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (finding that charging the defendant with burglary of a structure, as opposed to burglary of a [*1208] conveyance, was not reversible error because “[t]here was ‘not such variance [between the charge and the proof] here as c…
Authorities Cited
- Dozier v. State, 662 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)