Singletary v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Singletary v. State

400 So. 2d 173, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20321

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 23, 1981

DocketNo. 79-1986

StatusPublished

This text of 400 So. 2d 173 (Singletary 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

Singletary v. State, 400 So. 2d 173, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20321 (Fla. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of conviction and sentence for burglary [§ 810.02(3), Fla.Stat. (1979)], is affirmed as no attack is made on said judgment and sentence upon this appeal. The judgment ’of conviction and sentence for second degree theft [§ 812.014(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1979)] is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to enter a judgment of conviction and sentence for petit theft [§ 812.014(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (1979)], as the state failed to establish at trial that the alleged stolen property [i. e., jewelry, telephone, lighters, a soda bottle] had a market value of $100 or more at the time of the theft. Negron v. State, 306 So.2d 104 (Fla.1974); Todd v. State, 187 So.2d 908 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966); § 924.34, Fla. Stat. (1979).

Affirmed in part; reversed and remanded in part.

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

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of conviction and sentence for burglary [§ 810.02(3), Fla.Stat. (1979)], is affirmed as no attack is made on said judgment and sentence upon this appeal. The judgment ’of conviction and sentence for second degree theft [§ 812.014(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1979)] is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to enter a judgment of conviction and sentence for petit theft [§ 812.014(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (1979)], as the state failed to establish at trial that the alleged stolen property [i. e., jewelry, telephone, lighters, a soda bottle] had a market value of $100 or more at the time of the theft. Negron v. State, 306 So.2d 104 (Fla.1974); Todd v. State, 187 So.2d 908 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966); § 924.34, Fla. Stat. (1979).

Affirmed in part; reversed and remanded in part.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

400 So. 2d 173, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/singletary-v-state-fladistctapp-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack