B.S. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

B.S. v. State

572 So. 2d 1037, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 363, 1991 WL 4346

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 22, 1991

DocketNo. 90-1479

StatusPublished

This text of 572 So. 2d 1037 (B.S. v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

B.S. v. State, 572 So. 2d 1037, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 363, 1991 WL 4346 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, B.S., a juvenile, appeals an order withholding adjudication of delinquency and placing appellant on community control for possession of cocaine with intent to sell. Appellant’s sole contention on appeal is that the appellee, the State, presented insufficient evidence to establish appellant’s intent to sell cocaine.

The State concedes that the evidence adduced at the adjudicatory hearing was insufficient to support the charge of possession of cocaine with intent to sell. The State argues, however, and the appellant agrees, that there was sufficient evidence to find against appellant for possession of cocaine.

Based upon the State s and appellant s concessions, and our review of the record, we reverse insofar as the trial court found that appellant possessed cocaine with intent to sell, but affirm the order on the ground that appellant had committed the offense of possession of cocaine. C.L.L. v. State, 566 So.2d 878 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); McCullough v. State, 541 So.2d 720 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, B.S., a juvenile, appeals an order withholding adjudication of delinquency and placing appellant on community control for possession of cocaine with intent to sell. Appellant’s sole contention on appeal is that the appellee, the State, presented insufficient evidence to establish appellant’s intent to sell cocaine.

The State concedes that the evidence adduced at the adjudicatory hearing was insufficient to support the charge of possession of cocaine with intent to sell. The State argues, however, and the appellant agrees, that there was sufficient evidence to find against appellant for possession of cocaine.

Based upon the State s and appellant s concessions, and our review of the record, we reverse insofar as the trial court found that appellant possessed cocaine with intent to sell, but affirm the order on the ground that appellant had committed the offense of possession of cocaine. C.L.L. v. State, 566 So.2d 878 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); McCullough v. State, 541 So.2d 720 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

572 So. 2d 1037, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 363, 1991 WL 4346, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bs-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack