Young v. State

424 So. 2d 960, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 18461
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Young v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 394 So. 2d 525
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 11, 1983·No. No. 81-1219·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We conclude that the only evidence at the trial which was admissible against the defendant-appellant, his own statement, was insufficient as a matter of law to justify the jury finding that he was guilty of the crime of false imprisonment. Sec. 787.02, Fla.Stat. (1979); see A.Y.G. v. State, 414 So.2d 1158 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Perez v. State, 390 So.2d 85 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Pack v. State, 381 So.2d 1199 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); Lockett v. State, 262 So.2d 253 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972); Douglas v. State, 214 So.2d 653 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968). As in the cases cited, Young could, at most, properly have been convicted only of being an accessory after the fact of his co-defendant’s commission of the offense, a crime with which the appellant was not charged. See A.Y.G. v. State, supra, 414 So.2d at 1159. For this reason, the judgment under review is reversed with directions to discharge the defendant.

KAPNER, LEWIS, Associate Judge, dissents.

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

Young v. State, 424 So. 2d 960, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 18461 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

424 So. 2d 960 (Young v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lockett v. State
262 So. 2d 253 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1972)
Douglas v. State
214 So. 2d 653 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1968)
Perez v. State
390 So. 2d 85 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)
Pack v. State
381 So. 2d 1199 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)
A. Y. G. v. State
414 So. 2d 1158 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)