Rodriguez v. State

460 So. 2d 514, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2617, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 16654
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Rodriguez v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 441 So. 2d 1129
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 11, 1984·No. No. 83-2456·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Rodriguez appeals a revocation of probation which was based on a finding that he committed an attempted burglary. We agree with appellant that the evidence was insufficient to prove an attempted burglary because: (a) the state failed to show the intent to commit an offense within Ms. Schraader’s home; and (b) the court erred in deriving that intent from section 810.07, Florida Statutes (1981), which does not operate in the case of an attempted burglary where there is no entry. State v. Waters, 436 So.2d 66, 69-70 (Fla.1983). However, it was clearly established that the defendant entered the property and, even in the face of Ms. Schraader’s warnings that she would call the police, attempted entry through the front door, the back door, and a window. Therefore, there was sufficient competent evidence to support a finding that Rodriguez committed the offense of trespass in violation of sections 810.08(1), (2)(b) and 810.011(1), Florida Statutes (1981).1 Consequently, the revocation of [515]*515probation is sustainable. Finding Rodriguez’ arguments about the illegality of the sentence to be without merit, the judgment and sentence are affirmed.

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

Rodriguez v. State, 460 So. 2d 514, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2617, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 16654 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

460 So. 2d 514 (Rodriguez v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Waters
436 So. 2d 66 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1983)