West v. StateWest v. State
- Reporters:
- ,
- Before:
- Hendry
Appellant, defendant in the trial court, seeks review of a judgment and sentence of two years incarcеration for breaking and entering a building with intent to commit a felony, to wit: grand larceny.
The evidence at trial revealed that appellant broke into the Buccаneer Lodge, where he recently had been employed, on June 8, 1972. Two police officers observеd appellant enter an office area of the building, and they waited approximately forty minutes for him tо leave, when they arrested him. Police searched the appellant and discovered only two keys to the building in his possession. Further testi-. mony indicated damage within the office to a desk drawer and to a door lock, and that a supply cabinet had been rifled. Howevеr, items of personal property in the office, including a watch, typewriters and an adding machine in excess of $100 in value had not been disturbed.
Based upon this evidence, a jury returned a verdict of guilty. Appellant argues that the trial judge should have directed a verdict of acquittal at the close of the state’s case beсause the evidence failed to prove an element of the crime, intent by the appellant to commit grand larceny.
Appellant concedes thаt the state satisfactorily proved a breaking and entering, and he is not guiltless. Therefore, we do not find error in thе court’s denial of a directed verdict of acquittal.
However, there is merit to appellant’s contеntion that the state failed to prove he intended tо commit grand larceny. It is clearly the law that the elеment of intent in
However, the Florida Supreme Cоurt in Jalbert v. State, Fla.1957, 95 So.2d 589, stated, “In the absence of other evidence or circumstances, the best evidenсe of what he (the defendant) intended to steal is what he did steal.” This court has held that where the state’s only evidence of an intent to commit grand larceny in a case of this nature is that a dwelling house contained prоperty valued in excess of $100, such evidence is not sufficient to prove intent. Thompson v. State, Fla.App.1968, 207 So.2d 692. In thе instant case, the evidence shows that appеllant was caught with two keys to the Buccaneer Lodge in his possession. We have determined from the recоrd that the evidence was sufficient to prove only a breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor, tо-wit: petit larceny. See
Accordingly, and by virtue of the provisions of
Reversed and remanded, with directions.