Legal Opinion

E.G., a child v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 9, 2015No. 4D14-1499, 4D14-1500 and 4D14-1501PublishedCited by 2 opinions

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

  1. A.G. v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1998
  2. A.D. v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2010
  3. James Tindal v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2014
  4. Robinson v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1997

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Gonzalez v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2019
  2. Gonzalez v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2019

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API