K.O. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

K.O. v. State

914 So. 2d 1044, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 18494, 2005 WL 3116526

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 23, 2005·No. No. 3D05-1729·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

K.O. appeals an order adjudicating him to be delinquent. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

K.O. argues that the evidence was legally insufficient to convict him of the charge of aggravated assault. We affirm on authority of L.R.W. v. State, 848 So.2d 1263, 1266 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003).

The State concedes that there is an error in the adjudicatory order. On count two, the charge of criminal mischief, the State acknowledges that the charge must be reduced to specify that the damage was under $200. See § 806.13(l)(b)l., Fla. Stat. (2004).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for correction of adjudicatory order.

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

PER CURIAM.

K.O. appeals an order adjudicating him to be delinquent. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

K.O. argues that the evidence was legally insufficient to convict him of the charge of aggravated assault. We affirm on authority of L.R.W. v. State, 848 So.2d 1263, 1266 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003).

The State concedes that there is an error in the adjudicatory order. On count two, the charge of criminal mischief, the State acknowledges that the charge must be reduced to specify that the damage was under $200. See § 806.13(l)(b)l., Fla. Stat. (2004).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for correction of adjudicatory order.

K.O. v. State, 914 So. 2d 1044, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 18494, 2005 WL 3116526 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

914 So. 2d 1044 (K.O. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related