Linville v. State

207 So. 3d 379, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 19230
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 30, 2016·No. Case No. 5D16-1807·Published

Opinion

COHEN, J.

The State properly concedes that Zachary N. Linville’s motion for return of personal property was legally sufficient. We agree and reverse and remand for further proceedings. See Bolden v. State, 875 So.2d 780, 782-83 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (noting that if motion for return of personal property is facially sufficient, trial court may order State to respond to motion or hold an evidentiary hearing).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

BERGER and WALLIS, JJ., concur.

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

Linville v. State, 207 So. 3d 379, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 19230 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016).

207 So. 3d 379 (Linville v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bolden v. State
875 So. 2d 780 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)