K.H. v. State

The evidence in this case is insufficient to establish the crime of burglary of a dwelling,1 because there was no proof of K.H.’s intent to commit an offense within the dwelling. However, the evidence adduced was sufficient to prove an unlawful trespass2 which in this case was a lesser necessarily included offense. Thus, we affirm K.H.’s adjudication of delinquency and commitment on this basis. See State v. G.C., 572 So.2d 1380 (Fla.1991) (merely being a passenger in a stolen automobile did not support a charge of burglary of the automobile but did establish trespass to a conveyance;…