E.G., a child v. State of Florida
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Opinion of the Court
PER .CURIAM.
We reverse appellant’s conviction of grand theft because the state failed to offer sufficient evidence that the value of the stolen cell phone was $300 or more. § 812.014(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2014). Although the victim testified that he had his original sales receipt, the state neglected to ask -him about the 'original purchase price of the phone, a fact which, when combined with testimony about the phone’s age, condition, and how it had been customized, would have supported a,finding that the “market value” of the phone “at the time and place of the offense” was at least $300. §…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- A.G. v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1998
- A.D. v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2010
- James Tindal v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2014
- Robinson v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1997
3Cited by2 opinions
- Gonzalez v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2019
- Gonzalez v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2019