Derral Wayne Hodgkins v. State of Florida

Because I disagree with the Court’s conclusion that there is insufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict of guilt in this case, I respectfully dissent. While the verdict of guilt rests on circumstantial evi*753dence, the permissiblé inferences from the evidence are sufficient for a rational trier of fact to conclude that the State proved Appellant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. As we have said many times, whether the evidence “exclude[s] all reasonable hypotheses of innocence is for the jury to determine.” State v. Law, 559 So.2d 187, 188 (Fla.1989). The majority has in effect…