Granville v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Granville v. State

373 So. 2d 716, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 15427

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 7, 1979

DocketNo. KK-281

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 373 So. 2d 716 (Granville 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

Granville v. State, 373 So. 2d 716, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 15427 (Fla. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

SHIVERS, Judge.

Granville seeks review of his conviction for arson in the first degree, Section 806.-01(1), Florida Statutes (1977), contending the evidence was insufficient to establish damage to a “structure”, as that term is defined in Section 806.01(3), Florida Statutes (1977). We affirm.

The evidence showed that the window area of the jail where Granville was confined and the exhaust fan therein was damaged by fire. This is sufficient to show damage to the “structure” since the window is clearly an integral part of the structure itself. K. R. M. v. State, 360 So.2d 806 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978) is distinguishable since therein only personal property within the structure was damaged. The conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.

MILLS, C. J., and ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., J., concur.

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

SHIVERS, Judge.

Granville seeks review of his conviction for arson in the first degree, Section 806.-01(1), Florida Statutes (1977), contending the evidence was insufficient to establish damage to a “structure”, as that term is defined in Section 806.01(3), Florida Statutes (1977). We affirm.

The evidence showed that the window area of the jail where Granville was confined and the exhaust fan therein was damaged by fire. This is sufficient to show damage to the “structure” since the window is clearly an integral part of the structure itself. K. R. M. v. State, 360 So.2d 806 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978) is distinguishable since therein only personal property within the structure was damaged. The conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.

MILLS, C. J., and ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

373 So. 2d 716, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 15427, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/granville-v-state-fladistctapp-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack