K.P. v. State

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT K.P., Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2D16-3652 Opinion filed November 17, 2017. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Manual A. Lopez, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Robert D. Rosen, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kiersten E. Jensen, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee. PER CURIAM. K.P. appeals from the disposition order withholding adjudication but finding him guilty of petit theft and burglary of a conveyance. The State's case rested upon the inference in section 812.022, Florida Statutes (2015), that "proof of possession of property recently stolen, unless satisfactorily explained, gives rise to an inference that the person in possession of the property knew or should have known that the property had been stolen." See § 812.022(2). Because K.P. "satisfactorily explained" his possession of the stolen item with unrefuted testimony, the trial court erred in denying the motion for judgment of dismissal. We therefore reverse and remand for entry of a judgment of dismissal. NORTHCUTT, BLACK, and SALARIO, 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.