Skip to main content

Pickett v. State

Citations

  • 839 So. 2d 860
  • 2003 WL 1027064

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • reversing the conviction for grand theft where the State only showed the purchase price for the stolen items and no other evidence of value was introduced
  • reversing conviction for grand theft \[b]ecause the State only established the purchase price for the items and there was no evidence establishing their value at the time of the theft\
  • reversing conviction for grand theft “[b]ecause the State only established the purchase price for the items and there was no evidence establishing their value at the time of the theft”
  • reversing the trial court's denial of a motion for judgment of acquittal because the State failed to prove that the value of stolen property exceeded $300, and remanding for \entry of conviction and sentence for petit theft of the second degree\
  • for purposes of establishing theft, “[v]alue may be established by direct testimony of fair market value. . . .”
  • to establish theft, “[v]alue may be established by direct testimony of fair market value . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Silberman

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

25 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.