Seymour v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Seymour v. State

246 So. 2d 155, 1971 Fla. App. LEXIS 6787

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 30, 1971

DocketNo. 70-851

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 246 So. 2d 155 (Seymour 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

Seymour v. State, 246 So. 2d 155, 1971 Fla. App. LEXIS 6787 (Fla. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Fred Howard Seymour, appeals from the judgment and sentence of the Criminal Court of Record for Dade County, Florida entered by the court after appellant was found guilty in a non-jury trial of buying, receiving or concealing stolen property.

Appellant contends that the trial court erred in finding him guilty because there was insufficient evidence adduced to support the conviction. We do not agree with appellant’s contention.

The necessary ingredient of the offense of receiving stolen property, knowing it to have been stolen, is knowledge on the receiver’s part at the time he receives the thing stolen, that the property is stolen, or of such fact as would put a person of ordinary intelligence and caution on inquiry.

The record shows that there was conflicting evidence; however, it is a fundamental principle that an appellate court does not sit as a trier of fact. Where there are conflicts in the evidence in a non-jury trial, it is within the province of the trial judge to reject any testimony he finds to be untrue and accept and rely upon that which he finds to be worthy of belief. Hoover v. State, Fla.App.1968, 212 So.2d 95.

No reversible error having been made to appear, the judgment and sentence appealed are affirmed.

Affirmed.

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