ELIJAH ROUNDTREE AND JOHN DAVID, APPELLANTS,
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.
Appellants convicted of attempted breaking and entering with intent to commit grand larceny; sufficiency of evidence challenge rejected where testimony established corporate ownership and presence of merchandise exceeding $75,000.
Evidence was sufficient to support conviction for attempted breaking and entering with intent to commit grand larceny where testimony established the building's corporate ownership and the presence of merchandise valued in excess of $75,000.
[1] Sufficiency of evidence to support breaking and entering conviction requires testimony establishing corporate ownership of the building and evidence of valuable merchandi…
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 intelligenceAppellants were charged with breaking and entering a building belonging to Miami Purveyors, Inc., with intent to commit grand larceny. They were found…
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 Attempted Breaking And Entering cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellants were informed against, charged with breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony, grand larceny. Upon trial they were found and adjudged guilty of attempt thereof, for which each was sentenced to imprisonment for five years, with credit for certain jail time served.
On this appeal therefrom the appellants challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to support the judgments rendered against them. The information charged breaking and entering a building (at a given address) alleged to be the property of Miami Purveyors, Inc., a corporation. Appellants contend the latter allegation is not supported by the evidence. We find no merit in that contention. The general manager of the company testified on that point without objection. See Harper v. State, Fla.App. 1964, 169 So.2d 512. We reject also the further contention of the appellants that there was no sufficient showing by the state regarding property in the building, upon which to support a finding of intent to commit grand larceny. It was disclosed in the evidence that a wholesale meat business was conducted on the prem*141ises, and that it contained merchandise of the company valued in excess of $75,000. See Dohry v. State, Fla.App.1968, 211 So.2d 603.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Waters, 436 So. 2d 66 (Fla. 1983)…ton v. State, 307 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 316 So. 2d 286 (Fla.1975); Jackson v. State, 300 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974), cert. denied, 312 So. 2d 753 (Fla.1975); Turner v. State, 267 So. 2d 882 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972); Roundtree v. State, 236 So. 2d 140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970); Dobry v. State, 211 So. 2d 603 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968); Groneau v. State, 201 So. 2d 599 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 207 So. 2d 452 (Fla.1967); Jones v. State, 192 So. 2d 285 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966). The question of the defendant’s inten…
-
Paulson v. State, 257 So. 2d 303 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)…previously obtained fingerprints ? We affirm. Appellant’s position upon the first issue is not sustained by the record. The record contains sufficient testimony from the owner as to the value of the property taken. Roundtree v. State, Fla.App.1970, 236 So. 2d 140. The question of the admissibility of the fingerprints of the appellant was first raised upon a motion to suppress the fingerprints. The basis of the motion to suppress was that the fingerprints were obtained upon appellant’s arrest for a previousl…
-
Roberts v. State, 254 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)…As to appellant’s point urging that the evidence is insufficient to support the judgment upon the information charging appellant with attempting to break and enter a building with intent to commit grand larceny, see Roundtree v. State, Fla.App.1970, 236 So. 2d 140. Affirmed.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Harper v. State, 169 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- Dobry v. State, 211 So. 2d 603 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)