Legal Opinion

Rudisel v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 16, 2003No. 1D02-4452Published

1Per curiam

The trial court did not err in denying appellant’s motion for judgment of acquittal, which was based on the theory that the mattress and bed sheet in his prison cell were not “contents” of the cell within the meaning of the arson statute, section 806.01(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2001). See, e.g., Higgins v. State, 565 So.2d 698 (Fla.1990) (affirming a first-degree felony arson conviction where the defendant set fire to the mattress in his prison cell even though there was no evidence of damage to the building). Compare State v. Tomblin, 400 So.2d 1012 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981) (reversing dismissal…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Higgins v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1990
  2. State v. TomblinDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1981

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

Powered by the Exa API