State v. Hector

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Hector

138 So. 3d 1063, 2014 WL 1686461, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 6219

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 30, 2014

DocketNo. 4D13-961

StatusPublished

This text of 138 So. 3d 1063 (State v. Hector) 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

State v. Hector, 138 So. 3d 1063, 2014 WL 1686461, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 6219 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant Jordan Hector and co-defendant Francisco Brock were charged with one count of fraud under section 440.105(4)(b)9., Florida Statutes (2012). The trial court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss, finding that, as the State was unable to prove that the defendants obtained employment for the purpose of workers’ compensation benefits, and that they had neither claimed, filed for, nor received workers’ compensation benefits, the defendants’ motion to dismiss was “well taken and appropriáte for granting.”

For the reasons set forth in this court’s opinion in State v. Brock, No. 4D13-962, 2014 WL 1686448 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014), we reverse the trial court’s order dismissing the fraud charge and remand the cause to the trial court for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings. '

GROSS, GERBER and FORST, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Defendant Jordan Hector and co-defendant Francisco Brock were charged with one count of fraud under section 440.105(4)(b)9., Florida Statutes (2012). The trial court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss, finding that, as the State was unable to prove that the defendants obtained employment for the purpose of workers’ compensation benefits, and that they had neither claimed, filed for, nor received workers’ compensation benefits, the defendants’ motion to dismiss was “well taken and appropriáte for granting.”

For the reasons set forth in this court’s opinion in State v. Brock, No. 4D13-962, 2014 WL 1686448 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014), we reverse the trial court’s order dismissing the fraud charge and remand the cause to the trial court for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings. '

GROSS, GERBER and FORST, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

138 So. 3d 1063, 2014 WL 1686461, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 6219, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hector-fladistctapp-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack