A.P., 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 appellate court reversed a juvenile's adjudication of delinquency for grand theft and burglary. The court agreed with the state's confession of error, finding insufficient evidence to support the charges, but upheld the adjudication for resisting an officer.
No, there was insufficient evidence to support the adjudication for grand theft and burglary. The court agreed with the state's confession of error on these charges.
[1] A conviction for grand theft and burglary of an unoccupied conveyance may be reversed where the state fails to establish that the vehicle involved in the charged offense…
[2] A confession of error by the state, if agreed with by the appellate court, warrants reversal of the trial court's order.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Based on the state’s proper confession of error, with which we agree, we reverse the part of the trial court’s order withholding adjudication of delinquency, and placing A.P. on probation, for grand theft and burglary of an unoccupied conveyance, and remand for entry of judgment of dismissal as to these charges.”
Establishes the court's decision to reverse the adjudication for specific charges based on the state's concession.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA juvenile, A.P., was adjudicated delinquent for grand theft, burglary of an unoccupied conveyance, and resisting an officer. The state confessed erro…
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 Unoccupied Conveyance cases and more on FLexlaw
ON CONFESSION OF ERROR
Based on the state’s proper confession of error, with which we agree, we reverse the part of the trial court’s order withholding adjudication of delinquency, and placing A.P. on probation, for grand theft and burglary of an unoccupied conveyance, and remand for entry of judgment of dismissal as to these charges. See J.E.P. v. State, 561 So.2d 10, 11 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (reversing adjudication of delinquency where “[tjhere is insufficient evidence to establish that the van J.E.P. was attempting to jump-start was the same van charged in the information”); C.O. v. State, 557 So.2d 637, 638 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (reversing adjudication of delinquency where “[tjhere is no evidence establishing that the white 1985 Toyota Camry stolen from Ms. Dixon at the 163rd Street shopping center on January 14th was the same vehicle as the white, four door car which Mr. August observed C.O. driving at 7742 N.W. 5th Court on January 15th”); J.G. v. State, 539 So.2d 39, 40 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (“We reverse J.G.’s adjudications of delinquency and remand the cause to the trial court with directions to enter judgments of acquittal based upon the state’s failure to establish ownership of the automobile which J.G. was charged with burglarizing and failure to establish ownership of the automobile parts which J.G. was charged with stealing.”); C.B. v. State, 519 So.2d 686, 687 (Fla. 3d DCA *10841988) (“[T]he motion for a judgment of acquittal should have been granted because the evidence as to proof of ownership of the automobile which the appellant was charged with attempting to burglarize was woefully deficient to support the finding that the appellant had committed such attempted burglary.”). AP, does not- appeal, and the state does not confess error as to, the part of the trial court’s order withholding adjudication of delinquency and placing him on probation for resisting a law enforcement officer without violence. That part of the trial court’s order stands as unaffected by this appéal.
Reversed and remanded with instructions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- C.O. v. State, 557 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Smith v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 519 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)
- C.B. v. State, 519 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Commercial Ventures, Inc. v. Tropero Invs., N.V., 539 So. 2d 39 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- CAN AM Inv. Realty, Inc. v. A.F. "Jerry" Egan, 561 So. 2d 10 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)