R.M. v. State, 450 So. 2d 897

BASKIN, Judge.

We reverse the order adjudicating R.M. delinquent based upon our finding that the conviction for grand theft was not supported by the evidence. The state failed to demonstrate that R.M. had either the requisite intent to steal the automobile or knowledge that the vehicle he was driving was stolen. State v. Lewis, 364 So.2d 1223 (Fla.1978); State v. Allen, 362 So.2d 10 (Fla.1978); R.M. v. State, 412 So.2d 44 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). R.M.’s “unrefuted, exculpatory and not unreasonable explanation of his possession” of the stolen automobile— that he borrowed it from his stepfather— “rendered the state’s case ... insufficient as a matter of law to establish guilt.” R.A.L. v. State, 402 So.2d 1337 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). See Fisk v. State, 138 Fla. 815, 190 So. 10 (1939); R.M. v. State; A.R. v. State, 393 So.2d 1174 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).

Reversed.

Case Details

Case Name: R.M. v. State

Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida

Date Published: May 22, 1984

Citations: 450 So. 2d 897; 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 13398; No. 83-1069

Docket Number: No. 83-1069

Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.