In the Interest of J.M. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

In the Interest of J.M. v. State

292 So. 2d 398, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 7755

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 2, 1974·No. No. 73-1356·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant seeks reversal of a delinquency order, on the ground on insufficiency of the evidence. The basis of the petition on which the order was entered was that the juvenile had engaged in shoplifting, the theft of a pair of shoes or boots from the store of J. C. Penney Co. On consideration of the record we hold the contention of the appellant that the evidence relating thereto was insufficient, is without merit. A security guard of the store who apprehended the appellant testified he observed the entire transaction, the taking of the shoes by the appellant from a counter in the store, the placing thereof in a bag and his departure from the store therewith without payment.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant seeks reversal of a delinquency order, on the ground on insufficiency of the evidence. The basis of the petition on which the order was entered was that the juvenile had engaged in shoplifting, the theft of a pair of shoes or boots from the store of J. C. Penney Co. On consideration of the record we hold the contention of the appellant that the evidence relating thereto was insufficient, is without merit. A security guard of the store who apprehended the appellant testified he observed the entire transaction, the taking of the shoes by the appellant from a counter in the store, the placing thereof in a bag and his departure from the store therewith without payment.

Affirmed.

In the Interest of J.M. v. State, 292 So. 2d 398, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 7755 (Fla. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

292 So. 2d 398 (In the Interest of J.M. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related