K. W. U. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

K. W. U. v. State

367 So. 2d 647, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14452

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 23, 1979

DocketNo. 78-940

StatusPublished

Cited by22 cases

This text of 367 So. 2d 647 (K. W. U. 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

K. W. U. v. State, 367 So. 2d 647, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14452 (Fla. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

PEARSON, Judge.

The controlling question presented on this appeal is whether the rule that when circumstantial evidence is relied upon to prove guilt, it must be consistent only with guilt and must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, see Davis v. State, 90 So.2d 629 (Fla.1956), and Forbes v. State, 210 So.2d 246 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968), is applicable when the only element proved by circumstantial evidence is the intent of the defendant to participate in a crime which he did not commit, but for which he is charged as an aider and abettor.

We hold that the rule is applicable, and in the case of a defendant charged as an aider and abettor, the circumstantial evidence relied upon to show his intent to participate must be such as to preclude every reasonable inference that he did not intend to participate in the crime. Cf. Lockett v. State, 262 So.2d 253 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972); and Douglas v. State, 214 So.2d 653 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968).

The judgment declaring K. U., a juvenile, a delinquent is reversed.

Reversed.

BARKDULL, J., dissents.

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

PEARSON, Judge.

The controlling question presented on this appeal is whether the rule that when circumstantial evidence is relied upon to prove guilt, it must be consistent only with guilt and must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, see Davis v. State, 90 So.2d 629 (Fla.1956), and Forbes v. State, 210 So.2d 246 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968), is applicable when the only element proved by circumstantial evidence is the intent of the defendant to participate in a crime which he did not commit, but for which he is charged as an aider and abettor.

We hold that the rule is applicable, and in the case of a defendant charged as an aider and abettor, the circumstantial evidence relied upon to show his intent to participate must be such as to preclude every reasonable inference that he did not intend to participate in the crime. Cf. Lockett v. State, 262 So.2d 253 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972); and Douglas v. State, 214 So.2d 653 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968).

The judgment declaring K. U., a juvenile, a delinquent is reversed.

Reversed.

BARKDULL, J., dissents.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

367 So. 2d 647, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14452, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/k-w-u-v-state-fladistctapp-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack