HOWARD
v.
STATE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Value Of Stolen Property cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The trial court properly found that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction of petit theft. See J.P. v. State, 35 So. 3d 180, 181-82 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (holding that a principal was competent to testify as to the value of stolen projectors where the principal had “ordered the projectors, and [was] responsible for . . . purchasing and maintaining of all the school’s equipment and materials”).
The trial court also correctly determined that there was no competent, substantial evidence to support a conviction of criminal mischief in excess of $1,000. See A.S. v. State, 91 So. 3d 270, 271 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (holding that testimony regarding repair estimate for damaged vehicle should have been stricken where the actual estimates were not admitted into evidence and absent such testimony, there was no competent, substantial evidence demonstrating the element of value).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Moore v. State, 91 So. 3d 270 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
- J.P. v. State, 35 So. 3d 180 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)