E.C.
v.
STATE

Fla. 3d DCA | 2018-04-11
No. 17-0924
242 So. 3d 517 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2018)

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.


Holding

A juvenile cannot be convicted of trespass without evidence that the property entered constitutes a "structure" with a roof as defined by statute.


Headnotes

[1] Under Florida law, trespass requires entry into a "structure," which is statutorily defined as a building with a roof; absence of such a structure precludes conviction fo…

Previewing 1 of 1 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

Facts & Procedural History

E.C., a juvenile, was found guilty of trespass at a closed school construction site after an adjudicatory hearing. The evidence showed E.C. entered th…

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.


Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

We grant E.C.’s motion for rehearing, withdraw our opinion of March 7,

2018, and replace it with the following opinion.

E.C., a juvenile, was charged with burglary of an unoccupied structure and criminal mischief after having been caught at a closed school construction site.

After an adjudicatory hearing, E.C. was found guilty of the lesser included offense of trespass and absolved of the criminal mischief charge. To have trespassed, as charged, E.C. had to have entered a “structure.” § 810.08(1), Fla. Stat (2016). A

“structure” is defined as a building with “a roof over it.” § 810.011(1), Fla. Stat.

(2016). The facts in evidence indicate that E.C. entered the site at an early enough phase of construction that a building with a roof on it did not then exist. See I.L. v.

State, 3D17-1108 (Fla. 3d DCA Feb. 21, 2018).

Accordingly, we reverse E.C.’s conviction and remand for proceedings consistent herewith.

Reversed and remanded.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw