Koshada v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Koshada v. State

691 So. 2d 1142, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 4119, 1997 WL 175259

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 14, 1997

DocketNo. 96-2565

StatusPublished

This text of 691 So. 2d 1142 (Koshada 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

Koshada v. State, 691 So. 2d 1142, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 4119, 1997 WL 175259 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal, appellant seeks review of his convictions for burglary of a dwelling and grand theft. The only issue presented is whether the trial court committed reversible error when it denied appellant’s motion for a judgment of acquittal. Having carefully reviewed the evidence presented during the trial, we agree with appellant that, viewed in a light most favorable to the state, there was not competent evidence of guilt which was inconsistent with appellant’s reasonable hypothesis of innocence. Accordingly, because all of the evidence was circumstantial, the motion for judgment of acquittal should have been granted. E.g., State v. Law, 559 So.2d 187 (Fla.1989); Cox v. State, 555 So.2d 352 (Fla.1989).

We reverse appellant’s convictions, and remand with directions that a judgment of acquittal be entered and that appellant be discharged.

REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions.

ALLEN, WEBSTER and MICKLE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal, appellant seeks review of his convictions for burglary of a dwelling and grand theft. The only issue presented is whether the trial court committed reversible error when it denied appellant’s motion for a judgment of acquittal. Having carefully reviewed the evidence presented during the trial, we agree with appellant that, viewed in a light most favorable to the state, there was not competent evidence of guilt which was inconsistent with appellant’s reasonable hypothesis of innocence. Accordingly, because all of the evidence was circumstantial, the motion for judgment of acquittal should have been granted. E.g., State v. Law, 559 So.2d 187 (Fla.1989); Cox v. State, 555 So.2d 352 (Fla.1989).

We reverse appellant’s convictions, and remand with directions that a judgment of acquittal be entered and that appellant be discharged.

REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions.

ALLEN, WEBSTER and MICKLE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

691 So. 2d 1142, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 4119, 1997 WL 175259, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/koshada-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack