Grantz v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Grantz v. State

268 So. 2d 572, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6045

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 7, 1972·No. No. 71-448·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinions

REED, Chief Judge.

We have carefully considered each of the appellant’s seven points on appeal and conclude that none demonstrates reversible error. In his reply brief, the appellant advises this court that his fifth point presents a question of first impression, to-wit, whether a wife as a matter of law can be guilty of larceny of her husband’s separate property. We answer the question in the affirmative on the rationale explicated in State v. Herndon, 1946, 158 Fla. 115, 27 So.2d 833. We also conclude that the trial judge’s instruction on this question was adequate.

The judgment and sentence appealed from are affirmed.

Affirmed.

MAGER, J., concurs. WALDEN, J., dissents in part, concurs in part.

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

REED, Chief Judge.

We have carefully considered each of the appellant’s seven points on appeal and conclude that none demonstrates reversible error. In his reply brief, the appellant advises this court that his fifth point presents a question of first impression, to-wit, whether a wife as a matter of law can be guilty of larceny of her husband’s separate property. We answer the question in the affirmative on the rationale explicated in State v. Herndon, 1946, 158 Fla. 115, 27 So.2d 833. We also conclude that the trial judge’s instruction on this question was adequate.

The judgment and sentence appealed from are affirmed.

Affirmed.

MAGER, J., concurs. WALDEN, J., dissents in part, concurs in part.

Grantz v. State, 268 So. 2d 572, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6045 (Fla. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

268 So. 2d 572 (Grantz v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinions

Related