KEITH ROBERT JOHNSON, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE.

Citator

Cited By

• Risech v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2020)
  …ing his motion for judgment of acquittal on the harassing a victim charge. An appellate court reviews a trial court’s denial of such a motion de novo to determine whether the evidence is legally sufficient to sustain a conviction. Johnson v. State, 287 So. 3d 673, 676 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019). In doing so, the court must consider the evidence and all reasonable inferences therefrom in a light most favorable to the State. Id. In a case where the State submitted some direct evidence, the denial of a motion for j…
• Barr v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2020)
  …ent as to why the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction must be presented to the trial court.” Id. at 513. Because the argument raised on appeal was clearly not preserved, Appellant’s conviction should be affirmed. See Johnson v. State, 287 So. 3d 673, 676 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019) (holding that because the appellant did not raise a circumstantial evidence/reasonable hypothesis argument below, the argument was not preserved for appeal); Charles v. State, 253 So. 3d 1230, 1233 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018) (“Here…
• Ford v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2020)
  …evidence showed that Ford had a gun in his hand or shot at a specific person. Because Ford failed to specifically raise the “circumstantial evidence/reasonable hypothesis argument below, that argument was not preserved for appeal.” Johnson v. State, 287 So. 3d 673, 676 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019). In addition, Ford would not be entitled to that standard of review even if his argument had been properly preserved. The supreme court has since receded from the special standard of appellate review previously applied to c…