H.S. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

H.S. v. State

583 So. 2d 807, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 8318, 1991 WL 152949

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 13, 1991·No. No. 90-2612·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to the concession by the State of Florida which correctly agrees “that the State failed to produce evidence showing the value of the object that was involved in the grand theft ... ”, the adjudication of grand theft is reversed, with this case being remanded to the trial court for the purpose of entering an adjudication for pet-it theft in connection with Count II of the Petition. See Cofield v. State, 474 So.2d 849 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). In all other respects, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded with directions.

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

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to the concession by the State of Florida which correctly agrees “that the State failed to produce evidence showing the value of the object that was involved in the grand theft ... ”, the adjudication of grand theft is reversed, with this case being remanded to the trial court for the purpose of entering an adjudication for pet-it theft in connection with Count II of the Petition. See Cofield v. State, 474 So.2d 849 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). In all other respects, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded with directions.

H.S. v. State, 583 So. 2d 807, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 8318, 1991 WL 152949 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

583 So. 2d 807 (H.S. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related