R. M. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

R. M. v. State

372 So. 2d 1165, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 15456

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 17, 1979

DocketNo. 77-2431

StatusPublished

This text of 372 So. 2d 1165 (R. M. 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

R. M. v. State, 372 So. 2d 1165, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 15456 (Fla. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by R.M. and W.P., juveniles, from an adjudication of delinquency based upon the trial court’s finding them guilty of the crimes of robbery.

Appellants challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the convictions. We find the point well taken as to appellant R.M. and reverse as to his conviction. Lockett v. State, 262 So.2d 253 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972); K. W. U. v. State, 367 So.2d 647 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); J. H. v. State, 370 So.2d 1219 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).

We have carefully considered the points on appeal by appellant W.P., and in the light of the record on appeal, briefs and argument of counsel we have concluded that W.P. has failed to demonstrate reversible error. Therefore, the order declaring W.P. a delinquent is affirmed. The order declaring R.M. a delinquent is reversed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by R.M. and W.P., juveniles, from an adjudication of delinquency based upon the trial court’s finding them guilty of the crimes of robbery.

Appellants challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the convictions. We find the point well taken as to appellant R.M. and reverse as to his conviction. Lockett v. State, 262 So.2d 253 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972); K. W. U. v. State, 367 So.2d 647 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); J. H. v. State, 370 So.2d 1219 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).

We have carefully considered the points on appeal by appellant W.P., and in the light of the record on appeal, briefs and argument of counsel we have concluded that W.P. has failed to demonstrate reversible error. Therefore, the order declaring W.P. a delinquent is affirmed. The order declaring R.M. a delinquent is reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

372 So. 2d 1165, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 15456, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/r-m-v-state-fladistctapp-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack