JS v. State

691 So. 2d 20, 1997 WL 134071
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMarch 26, 1997
Docket95-2911
StatusPublished

This text of 691 So. 2d 20 (JS 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.

Bluebook
JS v. State, 691 So. 2d 20, 1997 WL 134071 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Opinion

691 So.2d 20 (1997)

J.S., a juvenile, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 95-2911.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 26, 1997.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Louis Campbell, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Doquyen T. Nguyen, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before NESBITT, GREEN and SHEVIN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

J.S. appeals his adjudication of delinquency for the offense of possession of a misdemeanor amount of cannabis, and the special condition of community control imposed by the court that J.S. stay away from "negative peers." We find unmeritorious defendant's claim of error in his adjudication of delinquency. It is not necessary for the state to prove the identification of marijuana by chemical or scientific means. Pama v. State, 552 So.2d 309 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); A.A. v. State, 461 So.2d 165 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). An officer with adequate experience in the narcotics field and marijuana in particular, can identify a substance as marijuana by its appearance and odor. Id. Thus, the fact that the substance was not tested does not preclude the instant adjudication. Also, the trial judge used his discretion in determining the two officers here could testify as experts, and no clear error as to that decision has been shown. See Terry v. State, 668 So.2d 954, 960 (Fla.1996). We agree, however, as the state concedes, the special condition of community control instructing J.S. to stay away from "negative peers", is too vague to be enforceable. Accordingly, the case is remanded for clarification of the term. See McCord v. State, 679 So.2d 32, 33 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996).

*21 Thus, the adjudication of delinquency is affirmed, with the cause remanded for modification or clarification of the term "negative peers."

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

Related

Pama v. State
552 So. 2d 309 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
McCord v. State
679 So. 2d 32 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
Terry v. State
668 So. 2d 954 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1996)
A.A. v. State
461 So. 2d 165 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)
J.S. v. State
691 So. 2d 20 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
691 So. 2d 20, 1997 WL 134071, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/js-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.