JORGE ALVAREZ, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
JORGE ALVAREZ, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
56 So. 3d 912
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2011)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case
Opinion of the Court
We affirm, without discussion, Alvarez’s convictions for trespass and dealing in stolen property. However, we reverse his conviction for grand theft1 because the State’s evidence was insufficient to establish that the stolen items had a value of $300 or more. See Smith v. State, 955 So.2d 1227, 1229 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (State required to present competent evidence to prove value of stolen property at time of crime).
On remand, the trial court shall enter a judgment and sentence on Count IV on the lesser offense of petit theft of the second degree.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED.
ORFINGER, LAWSON and EVANDER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rivera v. State, 73 So. 3d 333 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011)…ra argues that the State failed to present sufficient evidence of the fair market value of the stolen property and, as a result, his felony conviction should be reduced to the lesser offense of petit theft of the second degree. See Alvarez v. State, 56 So. 3d 912 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011); see also Smith v. State, 955 So. 2d 1227, 1229 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (holding that state is required to present competent evidence to prove value of stolen property at time of theft). The contemporaneous objection rule applies to…
Authorities Cited
- Mulligan v. State, 955 So. 2d 1227 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)