Coyle v. State

493 So. 2d 550, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1941
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedSeptember 10, 1986
Docket85-2444
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 493 So. 2d 550 (Coyle 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
Coyle v. State, 493 So. 2d 550, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1941 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Opinion

493 So.2d 550 (1986)

Robert M. COYLE, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 85-2444.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

September 10, 1986.

*551 Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Jeffrey L. Anderson, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Sarah B. Mayer, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

GUNTHER, Judge.

Robert M. Coyle appeals his judgment of conviction and sentence and contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal. We reverse.

Appellant was convicted of theft of Harold Houser's vehicle pursuant to section 812.014(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1983). Appellant moved for judgment of acquittal on the ground that the prosecutor failed to prove that the vehicle found in appellant's possession was the car that was taken from Houser. The judgment of acquittal should have been granted because the record reveals that there was insufficient evidence that the vehicle in Coyle's possession was the same as the vehicle taken from Houser. There is a missing link because there is no evidence to connect the car the police returned to Houser and the car found in Coyle's possession. See Morgan v. State, 186 So.2d 795 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966).

The Double Jeopardy Clause of the United States Constitution compels us to remand this case with instructions to the trial court to discharge the appellant because the State failed to present sufficient evidence at trial that the vehicle in Coyle's possession was the vehicle taken from Houser. See Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. 1, 98 S.Ct. 2141, 57 L.Ed.2d 15 (1978); Greene v. Massey, 437 U.S. 19, 98 S.Ct. 2151, 57 L.Ed.2d 15 (1978); Kimbler v. State, 360 So.2d 1270 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

DELL and WALDEN, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Ramsammy v. State
43 So. 3d 100 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)
Santiago v. State
874 So. 2d 617 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)
Rossi v. State
717 So. 2d 611 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
In the Interest of AP
636 So. 2d 790 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
J.E.P. v. State
561 So. 2d 10 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
In the Interest of S.P.L. v. State
512 So. 2d 1153 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
SPL v. State
512 So. 2d 1153 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
493 So. 2d 550, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1941, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coyle-v-state-fladistctapp-1986.