Heddings v. State
This text of 484 So. 2d 66 (Heddings 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.
Opinion
We affirm the conviction for grand theft as appellant has failed to show reversible error. The circumstantial evidence pointed to appellant as the perpetrator of the offense to the reasonable exclusion of any other person. See Love v. State, 438 So.2d 142 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).
We vacate the sentencing part of the judgment with instructions to the trial court to impose a sentence within the guideline range or to give written reasons for departure from the sentencing guide[67]*67lines. State v. Boynton, 478 So.2d 351 (Fla.1985).
Affirmed in part and remanded for further proceedings accordingly.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
484 So. 2d 66, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 563, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6667, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/heddings-v-state-fladistctapp-1986.