A.B. v. STATE OF FLORIDA

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA A.B., Appellant, v. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED CASE NO. 1D06-2809 STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _____________________________/ Opinion filed October 30, 2006. An appeal from the circuit court for Gadsden County. Angela C. Dempsey, Judge. Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Archie F. Gardner, Jr., Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Charlie Crist, Attorney General, and Sheron Wells, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee. PER CURIAM. Appellant seeks review of an adjudication of delinquency based on a finding that appellant had committed what would be third-degree grand theft if committed by an adult. Appellant contends that the evidence presented, viewed in a light most favorable to the state, established only the offense of second-degree petit theft. We agree and, accordingly, reverse and remand with directions that the trial court vacate the order of disposition and enter a new order of disposition finding that appellant committed what would be the offense of second-degree petit theft if committed by an adult. To establish a prima facie case that appellant committed third-degree grand theft, the state was obliged to prove that the property stolen was valued at $100 or more, but less than $300, and that it was taken from a dwelling as defined in s. 810.011(2) or from the unenclosed curtilage of a dwelling pursuant to s. 810.09(1). § 812.014(2)(d), Fla. Stat. (2005). Appellant was alleged to have taken a cellular telephone from the victim s home. While there is no question that he did so, the only evidence presented regarding value was to the effect that the victim paid $150 to open the contract for phone service approximately two months before the phone was stolen. No evidence was presented that the phone had any value independent of the contract cost, much less that it was worth more than $100. As a result, appellant could only be found to have committed a second-degree petit theft, as defined in section 812.014(3)(a), Florida Statutes (2005). REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions. WEBSTER, BENTON, and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., CONCUR. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.