W.J. v. State
This text of 406 So. 2d 60 (W.J. 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.
Opinion
With continuing reluctance, we are once again required to hold that the evidence against the juvenile respondent is insufficient to establish that he was guilty of the theft for which he was adjudicated delinquent either as the active perpetrator or as an aider and abettor. The victim was unable to identify W.J. as the one of two boys in the vicinity who actually grabbed her necklace and there is no showing that he committed any act which aided or assisted in the offense.1 Therefore, as we did on virtually identical facts in J.L.B. v. State, 396 So.2d 761 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), we must reverse the adjudication entered below and order W.J. discharged. See also, E.H.K. v. State, 405 So.2d 495 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); L.S. v. State, 391 So.2d 329 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).
Reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
406 So. 2d 60, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21680, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wj-v-state-fladistctapp-1981.