Giroux v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Giroux v. State

955 So. 2d 656, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 7105, 2007 WL 1342531

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 9, 2007

DocketNo. 4D06-2083

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 955 So. 2d 656 (Giroux 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

Giroux v. State, 955 So. 2d 656, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 7105, 2007 WL 1342531 (Fla. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was convicted of lewd and lascivious molestation of his stepdaughter by touching her vaginal area over her clothing. While he contends that the evidence was legally insufficient and required a judgment of acquittal, we disagree. Not only did the child and the mother see the appellant remove his hand from the child’s clothing, but when confronted by the mother, he essentially admitted to the conduct. The evidence met the elements of the statute. See § 800.04(5)(a), Florida Statutes (2005) (“A person who intentionally touches in a lewd or lascivious manner the breasts, genitals, genital area, or buttocks, or the clothing covering them, of a person less than 16 years of age ... commits lewd or lascivious molestation.”). Further, the question of whether the touching was committed lewdly or lasciviously is one of fact for the jury. See Rosen v. State, 940 So.2d 1155 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006).

Affirmed.

WARNER, POLEN and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was convicted of lewd and lascivious molestation of his stepdaughter by touching her vaginal area over her clothing. While he contends that the evidence was legally insufficient and required a judgment of acquittal, we disagree. Not only did the child and the mother see the appellant remove his hand from the child’s clothing, but when confronted by the mother, he essentially admitted to the conduct. The evidence met the elements of the statute. See § 800.04(5)(a), Florida Statutes (2005) (“A person who intentionally touches in a lewd or lascivious manner the breasts, genitals, genital area, or buttocks, or the clothing covering them, of a person less than 16 years of age ... commits lewd or lascivious molestation.”). Further, the question of whether the touching was committed lewdly or lasciviously is one of fact for the jury. See Rosen v. State, 940 So.2d 1155 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006).

Affirmed.

WARNER, POLEN and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

955 So. 2d 656, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 7105, 2007 WL 1342531, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/giroux-v-state-fladistctapp-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack