State v. Rose
804 So. 2d 454, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 15661, 26 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 2655
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Rose. Read the opinion of the Court — 876 So. 2d 1240 →
Opinion
The state appeals from the trial court’s order granting appellee, Denise Rose, a new trial. During the trial, the trial court refused appellee’s request that the trial court instruct the jury that she had to have had knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance she was charged with possessing contrary to the requirement of Chicone v. State, 684 So.2d 736 (Fla.1996). See also Hampton v. State, 796 So.2d 1260 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). Recognizing its error, the trial court granted appellee’s motion for new trial. We affirm.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Rose, 804 So. 2d 454, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 15661, 26 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 2655 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).
804 So. 2d 454 (State v. Rose) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hampton v. State
796 So. 2d 1260 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)
Chicone v. State
684 So. 2d 736 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1996)