State v. Skinner

397 So. 2d 389
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 22, 1981·No. SS-165·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

397 So.2d 389 (1981)

STATE of Florida, Appellant,
v.
Leander Alexander SKINNER, Appellee.

No. SS-165.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 22, 1981.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and A.S. Johnston, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.

Lacy Mahon, of Mahon, Mahon & Farley, Jacksonville, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This appeal by the State of Florida from the trial court's order dismissing the information against appellee presents a single issue: Did the trial court commit error in granting appellee's motion to dismiss charges of dealing in stolen property on the ground that the property alleged to have been stolen was, in fact, not stolen property?

Subsequent to the ruling here complained of, this court ruled upon the identical issue in Padgett v. State, 378 So.2d 118 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). That case holds that in a prosecution under Section 812.019, Florida Statutes (1977), proof of the stolen character of the goods is not essential to proof of the offense of "endeavoring to traffic in stolen property" (378 So.2d at 119). See Section 812.028, Florida Statutes (1977), and State v. Dickinson, 370 So.2d 762 (Fla. 1979).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

BOOTH, LARRY G. SMITH and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

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

State v. Skinner, 397 So. 2d 389 (Fla. Ct. App. 1981).

397 So. 2d 389 (State v. Skinner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Capaldo v. State
654 So. 2d 1207 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Lamar v. Keesee
512 So. 2d 1066 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
State v. Williams
442 So. 2d 240 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)
State v. Rios
409 So. 2d 241 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)