E.H., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
FULMER, Judge.
E.H. was found guilty of burglary of a dwelling and grand theft of the third degree. He challenges the sufficiency of the evidence for the grand theft charge, arguing that the State failed to prove the value of the stolen property. In D.H. v. State, 864 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004), we recently addressed the same issue in an appeal brought by a codefendant, and we agreed that the testimony was insufficient to meet the State’s burden of proof. Therefore, in accordance with our prior opinion in D.H., we reverse and remand for the trial court to reduce the grand theft to petit theft.
Reversed and remanded.
WHATLEY and NORTHCUTT, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Off. of the State Attorney for the Thirteenth Jud. Cir. of Fla. v. Gonzalez, 953 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…alez had sex with a minor. Finally, the Florida Department of Corrections attempted to require Mr. Gonzalez to provide a blood sample for DNA analysis until this court ruled that he was not required to do so under Florida law. See Gonzalez v. State, 869 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). Mr. Gonzalez therefore retained an attorney to make a public records request of the Office of the State Attorney for his entire closed litigation file in the hope that he would discover information about the [*761] gain time calc…
-
Smalley v. State, 889 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…crimes, or ones who have been arrested on probable cause, lose many rights to personal privacy under the 4th Amendment,5 as well as probationers.6 Our sister courts in this state have found this statute to be constitutional. See Gonzalez v. State, 869 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); L.S. v. State, 805 So. 2d 1004 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). The basis for these rulings is that a convicted person has no reasonable expectation of privacy with respect to blood samples for DNA testing which outweighs the state’s interes…
-
Morris v. State, 909 So. 2d 428 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)…So. 2d 719 (Fla. 5th DCA [*435] 2004) (statutory requirement that defendant, who was convicted of lewd and lascivious molestation, provide DNA samples did not violate his fourth amendment right to be free from unlawful searches); Gonzalez v. State, 869 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (finding no merit to defendant’s argument that section 943.325 is unconstitutional); L.S. v. State, 805 So. 2d 1004 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001), rev. denied, 821 So. 2d 297 (Fla.2002) (DNA testing requirement did not violate juvenile’s ri…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- D.H. v. State, 864 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)