WILLIAM JAMES JACKSON AND VICTOR WILLIAM BOYD, 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.
Court reversed convictions for breaking and entering with intent to commit grand larceny, holding that evidence of property value alone is insufficient to prove intent to commit grand larceny; remanded for conviction of lesser offense of breaking and entering with intent to commit petit larceny.
Evidence that a dwelling contained property valued in excess of $100 is insufficient to prove intent to commit grand larceny in a breaking and entering case.
[1] Evidence that a dwelling contained property valued in excess of $100 is insufficient standing alone to prove intent to commit grand larceny in a breaking and entering pro…
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 broke into and entered a dwelling, remained inside for only one or two minutes, took nothing, and were apprehended shortly thereafter. The …
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 Breaking And Entering With Intent To Commit Petit Larceny cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Defendant-appellants, William Jackson and Victor Boyd, were informed against, tried by jury, found guilty and sentenced respectively to ten and five years in the state penitentiary for breaking and entering a dwelling with intent to commit grand larceny.
For their sole point on appeal, appellants contend that the evidence adduced at trial established that they were guilty only of breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor, to wit: petit larceny. We agree.
This court has held that where the State’s only evidence of an intent to commit grand larceny in a case of this nature is that a dwelling house contained property valued in excess of $100, such evidence is not sufficient to prove intent. West v. State, Fla.App.1974, 289 So. 2d 758. The evidence adduced at trial in the case at bar consisted of? (1) that the subject dwelling contained property in excess of $100, and (2) the defendants broke into and entered the victim’s home only for a minute or two and then ran out without having taken any personalty. Shortly thereafter they were apprehended by the police. Thus, we have determined that the evidence was sufficient to prove only a breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor, to wit: petit larceny.
Accordingly, the judgments and sentences herein appealed are reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to enter judgments against the appellants for breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor, to wit: petit larceny, and to impose new sentences thereon.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Waters, 436 So. 2d 66 (Fla. 1983)…ate, 95 So. 2d 589 (Fla.1957); Turknett v. State, 116 Fla. 562, 156 So. 538 (1934); Walker v. State, 44 Fla. 466, 32 So. 954 (1902); Clifton v. State, 26 Fla. 523, 7 So. 863 (1890); Charles v. State, 36 Fla. 691, 18 So. 369 (1895); 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); Dobry v. State, 211 So. 2d 603 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968); Bonamy v. State, 205 So. 2d 707 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968); Groneau v. State, 201 So. 2d 599…1 / 2
-
State v. Jackson, 312 So. 2d 753 (Fla. 1975)…Certiorari denied. 300 So. 2d 47. ADKINS, C. J., and ROBERTS, McCAIN, OVERTON and ENGLAND, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- West v. State, 289 So. 2d 758 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)