Perez v. State

Appellant, Julio Perez, appeals his conviction for trafficking in cocaine. We affirm.

Appellant contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion of acquittal, because there was insufficient circumstantial evidence presented at trial necessary to exclude all reasonable hypotheses of innocence. Appellee, State, asserts that the circumstantial evidence presented at trial excluded any reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

The question of whether the evidence fails to exclude all reasonable hypothesis of innocence is for the jury to determine. Heiney v. State, 447 So.2d 210 (Fla.), cert.…