T.A. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

T.A. v. State

10 So. 3d 1201, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 8857

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 17, 2009

DocketNo. 4D08-2971

StatusPublished

This text of 10 So. 3d 1201 (T.A. 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

T.A. v. State, 10 So. 3d 1201, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 8857 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was charged with grand theft and petit theft after a teacher at a day care center discovered that $593 was stolen from her purse located in a closet of [1202]*1202her classroom. We affirm the juvenile court’s finding that appellant committed grand theft. We reverse, however, the court’s denial of appellant’s motion for judgment of dismissal as to the charge of petit theft. The finding of guilt on this charge, which resulted from appellant’s rummaging through the closet of another teacher, was not supported by competent substantial evidence. We therefore remand this cause to the juvenile court with instructions to dismiss the petit theft charge.

Affirmed in pai't; Reversed in part.

TAYLOR, MAY and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was charged with grand theft and petit theft after a teacher at a day care center discovered that $593 was stolen from her purse located in a closet of [1202]*1202her classroom. We affirm the juvenile court’s finding that appellant committed grand theft. We reverse, however, the court’s denial of appellant’s motion for judgment of dismissal as to the charge of petit theft. The finding of guilt on this charge, which resulted from appellant’s rummaging through the closet of another teacher, was not supported by competent substantial evidence. We therefore remand this cause to the juvenile court with instructions to dismiss the petit theft charge.

Affirmed in pai't; Reversed in part.

TAYLOR, MAY and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 So. 3d 1201, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 8857, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ta-v-state-fladistctapp-2009.