Holloway v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Holloway v. State

687 So. 2d 336, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 425, 1997 WL 43847

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Holloway v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 712 So. 2d 439 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 5, 1997·No. No. 95-1736·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The testimony of its owner that he had purchased the stolen refrigerator for $449.93 a year and a half before the incident but did not know its present value was insufficient to support a conviction for grand theft, which requires a value of $300.00 or more. D.L. v. State, 546 So.2d 454 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), and cases cited. Accordingly, the grand theft conviction is reduced to petit theft and the cause remanded for resentencing as to that crime. Because we find no merit to the defendant’s challenge to his burglary conviction, the judgment and sentence for that offense are affirmed.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part.

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

PER CURIAM.

The testimony of its owner that he had purchased the stolen refrigerator for $449.93 a year and a half before the incident but did not know its present value was insufficient to support a conviction for grand theft, which requires a value of $300.00 or more. D.L. v. State, 546 So.2d 454 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), and cases cited. Accordingly, the grand theft conviction is reduced to petit theft and the cause remanded for resentencing as to that crime. Because we find no merit to the defendant’s challenge to his burglary conviction, the judgment and sentence for that offense are affirmed.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part.

Holloway v. State, 687 So. 2d 336, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 425, 1997 WL 43847 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

687 So. 2d 336 (Holloway v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related