ROBERT CHESTER KEEN, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
ROBERT CHESTER KEEN, APPELLANT,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
335 So. 2d 583
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1976)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Defendant claims that the evidence upon which he was found guilty by a jury of breaking and entering with intent to commit grand larceny was legally insufficient because it was circumstantial and did not preclude the reasonableness of his own explanation for his presence at the scene. A review of the evidence not only shows glaring inconsistencies in defendant’s story, but also completely fails to explain his exit from the house with a pillowcase filled with articles which the jury could reasonably have believed were removed from the premises. See Hernandez v. State, Fla.App.1974, 305 So. 2d 211.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Furman, 341 So. 2d 1056 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)…we expressly relied upon Tucker in affirming a lower court’s declaration which held that provisions in a policy upon two automobiles against stacking of uninsured motorist coverage were ineffective. Government Employees Insurance Company v. Dammert, 335 So. 2d 583 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). Therefore, based upon the above authority, we are of the opinion that the trial judge was correct in declaring that the uninsured motor vehicle coverage afforded each automobile in the policy could properly be stacked. See State…
Authorities Cited
- Hernandez, 305 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)