Kluth v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kluth v. State

821 So. 2d 1210, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 10671, 2002 WL 1723548

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 26, 2002

DocketNo. 5D01-1496

StatusPublished

This text of 821 So. 2d 1210 (Kluth 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

Kluth v. State, 821 So. 2d 1210, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 10671, 2002 WL 1723548 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

THOMPSON, C.J.

Kenneth D. Kluth appeals his conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in violation of section 790.23(e), Florida Statutes (1999). Kluth contends that the court should have granted his motion for judgment of acquittal because the state failed to prove that his right to possess a firearm was not, pursuant to the law of Georgia, restored upon the putative successful completion of a prior probation in Georgia. We affirm because the restoration of civil rights is an affirmative defense; the state does not have the burden of proving that a defendant’s civil rights have not been restored. Benitez v. State, 172 So.2d 520 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965).

AFFIRMED.

SHARP, W., and PALMER, JJ., concur.

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

THOMPSON, C.J.

Kenneth D. Kluth appeals his conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in violation of section 790.23(e), Florida Statutes (1999). Kluth contends that the court should have granted his motion for judgment of acquittal because the state failed to prove that his right to possess a firearm was not, pursuant to the law of Georgia, restored upon the putative successful completion of a prior probation in Georgia. We affirm because the restoration of civil rights is an affirmative defense; the state does not have the burden of proving that a defendant’s civil rights have not been restored. Benitez v. State, 172 So.2d 520 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965).

AFFIRMED.

SHARP, W., and PALMER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

821 So. 2d 1210, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 10671, 2002 WL 1723548, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kluth-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack