JOSE ISRAEL FLORES ARCINIEGAS
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
An appellate court reviewing a criminal conviction must affirm if the State presented competent, substantial evidence to support each element of the crime, and does not reweigh evidence or assess witness credibility.
[1] An appellate court reviewing a criminal conviction does not reweigh evidence or substitute its judgment for the trial court's on questions of witness credibility and the…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJose Israel Flores Arciniegas appealed his conviction from Miami-Dade County Court.…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed October 29, 2026.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
No. 3D25-1777
Lower Tribunal No. AL2EW5E
Jose Israel Flores Arciniegas,
Appellant,
vs.
State of Florida,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Marcus
Bach Armas, Judge.
Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Susan S. Lerner, Assistant
Public Defender, for appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Haccord J. Curry, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee.
Before LOGUE, MILLER and LOBREE, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Acosta v. State, 399 So. 3d 1118, 1124 (Fla. 3d DCA
2024) ("In conducting its review of the record, the appellate court does not reweigh the evidence, but simply determines whether competent, substantial evidence has been presented by the State as to each element of the crime.” (quoting Garcia v. State, 373 So. 3d 1213, 1222 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)));
Fitzsimmons v. State, 309 So. 3d 261, 265 (Fla. 1st DCA 2020) (stating a court "must affirm the trial court's ruling if the State presented competent,
substantial evidence to support the verdict”); Taylor v. State, 62 So. 3d 1101,
1113 (Fla. 2011) (noting an appellate court “does not substitute its judgment for that of the trial court on questions of the credibility of witnesses and the appropriate weight to be given to the evidence").
2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Taylor v. State, 62 So. 3d 1101 (Fla. 2011)
- Fitzsimmons v. State, 309 So. 3d 261 (Fla. 1st DCA 2020)
- Acosta v. State, 399 So. 3d 1118 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)