Grandison v. State

926 So. 2d 447, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 5409, 2006 WL 941955
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedApril 13, 2006
DocketNo. 1D05-2946
StatusPublished

This text of 926 So. 2d 447 (Grandison 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
Grandison v. State, 926 So. 2d 447, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 5409, 2006 WL 941955 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant challenges his convictions for possession of cannabis and cocaine. Because the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to prove his actual dr constructive possession of the contraband, the trial court erred by denying his motion for judgment of acquittal. See Hill v. State, 736 So.2d 133 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); see also Watson v. State, 877 So.2d 914 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004); Cruz v. State, 744 So.2d 568 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Agee v. State, 522 [448]*448So.2d 1044 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). We accordingly reverse the appellant’s convictions and remand this case with directions that he be discharged.

ALLEN, PADOVANO and BROWNING, JJ„ Concur.

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

Related

Agee v. State
522 So. 2d 1044 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Cruz v. State
744 So. 2d 568 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)
Hill v. State
736 So. 2d 133 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)
Watson v. State
877 So. 2d 914 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
926 So. 2d 447, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 5409, 2006 WL 941955, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grandison-v-state-fladistctapp-2006.