Yudin v. State

I concur with the majority in affirming the trial court’s decision to deny Yudin’s motion for judgment of acquittal but for reasons not expressed in the majority opinion. The State’s case against Yudin is entirely based on section 812.022(2), Florida Statutes (2009), which provides that “proof of possession of property recently stolen, unless satisfactorily explained, gives rise to an inference that the person in possession of the property knew or should have known that the property” was stolen and would support a conviction of theft. This same inference will support a burglary conviction if…