RASHAD JONES, 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.
Rashad Jones appealed his grand theft conviction, challenging the sufficiency of evidence regarding the value of stolen property. The court agreed that the State failed to prove the property's value met the $300 minimum for third-degree grand theft and reversed, reducing the conviction to petit theft.
The court held that the victim's 'best guess' as to replacement cost and testimony establishing only the original cost of stolen items are insufficient to prove fair market value under Florida law. The conviction for grand theft was reduced to petit theft.
[1] To establish the fair market value of stolen property, evidence of original cost, manner of use, condition, quality, and depreciation since purchase is required.
[2] Evidence of replacement cost for stolen property is admissible only when the fair market value at the time and place of the offense cannot be satisfactorily ascertained.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“An essential element of third-degree grand theft is proof that the value of the stolen property is $300 or more at the time of the theft.”
Establishes the statutory requirement that must be met for grand theft conviction
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJones was convicted of grand theft after items were stolen from a truck, including a telephone, audiovisual and microphone cables, and approximately t…
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 Original Market Cost cases and more on FLexlaw
[*586] KELLY, Judge.
Rashad Jones appeals from his conviction for grand theft. 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. We agree that the testimony was insufficient to meet the State’s burden of proof and, therefore, reverse and remand for the trial court to reduce the grand theft to petit theft.
An essential element of third-degree grand theft is proof that the value of the stolen property is $300 or more at the time of the theft. § 812.014(2)(c)(l), Fla. Stat. (2005); Pickett v. State, 839 So. 2d 860, 861 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). “Value means the market value of the property at the time and place of the offense or, if such cannot be satisfactorily ascertained, the cost of replacement of the property within a reasonable time after the offense.” § 812.012(10)(a)(l), Fla. Stat. (2005). Absent direct testimony of the market value of the property, the State can show value through evidence of the original market cost, the manner in which the item was used, its general condition and quality, and the percentage of depreciation since its purchase. Pickett, 839 So. 2d at 861-62.
The victim testified that his truck had been broken into and that a telephone, some audiovisual and microphone cables, and approximately ten CDs had been taken. When asked the fair market value of the stolen telephone and cables he stated, “[t]hree to four hundred dollar (sic) is my best guess.” Further questioning revealed that his “best guess” was based on the fact that his employer, who owned the telephone and the cables, kept his last paycheck of $400 to replace the lost equipment. The victim also stated that he paid between $142 and $200 for the stolen CDs.
Without more, neither a “best guess” as to replacement cost nor testimony establishing the original cost of stolen items suffice to prove fair market value. See id. (reversing the conviction for grand theft where the State only showed the purchase price for the stolen items and no other evidence of value was introduced); Toler v. State, 779 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (holding that testimony that stolen property was worth “roughly” $300 was insufficient); Gilbert v. State, 817 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (holding that evidence was insufficient where the owner guessed the value of her stolen VCR to be “like” $100).
Accordingly, we reduce Jones’s conviction for grand theft to petit theft and remand this case to the trial court for resentencing.
Reversed.
VILLANTI and LaROSE, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
A.D. v. State, 30 So. 3d 676 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)…ee Jackson v. State, 23 So. 3d 206 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009); Smith v. State, 955 So. 2d 1227 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007); Toler v. State, 779 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). An estimate of the value of the items, without more, is insufficient. See Jones v. State, 958 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007); Sellers v. State, 838 So. 2d 661 (Fla. 1st [*678] DCA 2003); Gilbert v. State, 817 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Toler, 779 So. 2d at 595. Because the State concedes that insufficient evidence was presented as to the value of…
-
Carter v. State, 77 So. 3d 849 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)…ct the trial court to enter judgment for the lesser ... offense”);2 see also § 812.014(3)(a) (providing that when the State proves the theft of property “not specified in subsection (2),” the State proves the offense of petit theft); Jones v. State, 958 So. 2d 585, 586 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (reducing defendant’s conviction from grand theft to petit theft when the State failed to prove the value of the items stolen). Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings. DAVIS and CRENSHAW, J…
-
Wiechert v. State, 170 So. 3d 109 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)…direct the trial court to enter judgment for the lesser ... offense”); see also Carter, 77 So. 3d at 852 (reducing defendant’s conviction from grand theft to petit theft when the State failed to prove the value of the items stolen); Jones v. State, 958 So. 2d 585, 586 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (same). In addition, because this change in convictions will affect Wiechert’s Criminal Punishment Code scoresheet, on remand the trial court must resentence Wiechert using a corrected scoresheet. Affirmed in part, reversed…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gilbert v. State, 817 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)
- Jacquelyn Postma v. State, 839 So. 2d 860 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)
- Toler v. State, 779 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)