Perkins v. State

40 So. 3d 778, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 7722, 2010 WL 2216925
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Perkins v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 1062
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 4, 2010·No. 5D08-3762·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of numerous crimes arising from improprieties she committed while working as a bookkeeper for a law firm. Appellant directs several of her points on appeal to her conviction for fraudulent use of personal identification information, on which she received a minimum mandatory three-year prison sentence. Although there were conflicts in the evidence on this count, the jury resolved those conflicts in favor of the State, and we cannot reweigh the evidence. Specifically, there was direct evidence that a crime was committed and sufficient circumstantial evidence that Appellant was the perpetrator. See Wilson v. State, 884 So.2d 1036, 1037 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). The evidence was also sufficient to establish that the victim of the crime was the “individual” whose name appeared on the fraudulently-obtained credit card. Appellant’s remaining points on appeal do not merit discussion.

AFFIRMED.

TORPY, LAWSON and EVANDER, JJ., concur.

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

Perkins v. State, 40 So. 3d 778, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 7722, 2010 WL 2216925 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010).

40 So. 3d 778 (Perkins v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wilson v. State
884 So. 2d 1036 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)