Harvey v. State
Opinion
Appellant seeks review of his convictions for grand larceny and for breaking and entering a dwelling.
[101]*101We have considered the record, briefs and arguments of counsel in light of the controlling principles of law and have concluded that no reversible error has been demonstrated as to appellant’s conviction for grand larceny. Thus, as to that conviction we affirm.
However, the appellant has noted, and the state has conceded, that insufficient evidence appears of record to sustain a conviction for breaking and entering. Thus, pursuant to § 924.34, Fla.Stat., F.S. A.,1 we reverse the conviction as to breaking and entering and direct the trial court to enter judgment for the offense of entering without breaking, pursuant to § 810.03, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
273 So. 2d 100 (Harvey v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.