FIDEL RODRIGUEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1997-03-05
No. 96-1883
Before COPE, LEVY and FLETCHER, JJ.
688 So. 2d 1023 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1997)

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

As the defendant-appellant’s boilerplate motion for judgment of acquittal did not set forth the argument he now seeks to advance on appeal [based on L.J. v. State, 578 So. 2d 360 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)], we conclude that the challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence is not preserved for appellate review. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.380(b); James v. State, 525 So. 2d 426, 427 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Johnson v. State, 478 So. 2d 885, 886 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Patterson v. State, 391 So. 2d 344, 345 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Daley v. State, 374 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); De La Cova v. State, 355 So. 2d 1227, 1230 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw