midpage

Miller v. StateMiller v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida
Jun 28, 1968
Nos. 67-253, 67-324
Versions:212 So. 2d 388
1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 5325
MANN, Judge.

The only testimony relative to value during the trial of these defendants for grand larceny and breaking and entering a dwelling house with intent to commit grand larceny is the following:

“Q. Would you tell the Jury what was missing?
A. A stereo, two TV’s, á Hallicrafter ship-to-shore radio, a watch, some records.
Q. All right. And what value did you place on all of this ?
A. Eight hundred.
Q. Eight hundred dollars ?
A. (Witness nodded affirmatively.)”

This is insufficient. Suarez v. State, 136 So.2d 367 (2d D.C.A.Fla.1962).

The other points raised by appellants are without merit. Pursuant to Florida Statutes § 924.34 (1967), F.S.A., judgment of the trial court is reversed and remanded with instruction to enter judgment of conviction on the lesser included offenses and to pass sentence accordingly.

LILES, C. J., and HOBSON, J., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Miller v. State
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Jun 28, 1968
Citations: 212 So. 2d 388; 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 5325; Nos. 67-253, 67-324
Docket Number: Nos. 67-253, 67-324
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
Log In