Juan Bridon v. the State of Florida
This text of Juan Bridon v. the State of Florida (Juan Bridon v. the State of Florida) 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.
Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed April 9, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
No. 3D24-0390 Lower Tribunal No. B23-15795
Juan Bridon, Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida, Appellee.
An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Cristina Rivera Correa, Judge.
Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Maria Lauredo, Chief Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Daniel Colmenares, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before EMAS, FERNANDEZ and MILLER, JJ.
PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Morris v. State, 721 So. 2d 725, 726-27 (Fla. 1998)
(finding that a motion for judgment of acquittal can be made at the close of
the State’s evidence, and in order to preserve the issue for appeal, the
defendant is not required to renew the motion after the defendant has
presented evidence); Morissette v. United States, 342 U.S. 246, 255-56
(1952) (stating that a certain class of “public welfare offenses” do not require
intent); State v. Gruen, 586 So. 2d 1280, 1281 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (“[C]rimes
proscribing conduct not prohibited at common law or crimes ‘mala prohibita’,
which usually result from neglect, do not require any criminal intent.”).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Juan Bridon v. the State of Florida, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/juan-bridon-v-the-state-of-florida-fladistctapp-2025.