I.V. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

I.V. v. State

562 So. 2d 854, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 4462, 1990 WL 83617

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in I.V. v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 11855 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 21, 1990·No. No. 89-337·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, a juvenile, appeals the denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal and his subsequent conviction of two counts of grand theft of an automobile. The evidence against appellant was sparse and entirely circumstantial. Because the state failed to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, we reverse. E.g., Newberry v. State, 442 So.2d 334 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).

REVERSED.

COBB, PETERSON and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, a juvenile, appeals the denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal and his subsequent conviction of two counts of grand theft of an automobile. The evidence against appellant was sparse and entirely circumstantial. Because the state failed to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, we reverse. E.g., Newberry v. State, 442 So.2d 334 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).

REVERSED.

COBB, PETERSON and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.

I.V. v. State, 562 So. 2d 854, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 4462, 1990 WL 83617 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

562 So. 2d 854 (I.V. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related