Hankins v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hankins v. State

172 So. 2d 504, 1965 Fla. App. LEXIS 4360

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 23, 1965

DocketNo. 64-405

StatusPublished

This text of 172 So. 2d 504 (Hankins 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

Hankins v. State, 172 So. 2d 504, 1965 Fla. App. LEXIS 4360 (Fla. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was found guilty, adjudicated, and sentenced for larceny of an automobile. On this appeal he urges that although the State proved him guilty of using the automobile without the consent of the owner, it did not prove him guilty of an intent to steal. He relies upon Flowers v. State, 106 Fla. 686, 143 So. 612 (1932).

In the Flowers case it was held that the explanation of the defendants was entirely plausible and reasonable and consistent with the innocence of each of them so far as the act of larceny was concerned. The evidence presented in Flowers v. State, supra, showed that neither defendant was present when the automobile was stolen and that they had merely been invited to ride in it.

The evidence in the present case includes, the admission of the defendant that he was the one who stole the car. The record contains no explanation of why he took the-car from Miami to Live Oak, Florida other than for the purpose of stealing it.

We hold that the judgment is supported', by the evidence.

Affirmed.

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