From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schultz v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Feb 1, 2013
105 So. 3d 1280 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

Summary

vacating conviction for grand theft and remanding for conviction for first-degree petit theft

Summary of this case from Mitchell v. State

Opinion

No. 2D12–853.

2013-02-1

Michael SCHULTZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Collier County; Frederick R. Hardt, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Jean Marie Henne, Special Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Cerese Crawford Taylor, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.


Appeal from the Circuit Court for Collier County; Frederick R. Hardt, Judge.
Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Jean Marie Henne, Special Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Cerese Crawford Taylor, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.
CASANUEVA, Judge.

Michael Schultz was convicted of armed burglary and grand theft, and he appeals, raising three issues. Of the three issues we find merit in only the third, that the State failed to provide sufficient proof of the value of the items taken during the burglary to support the charge of third-degree grand theft (greater than $300 but less than $5000). See Negron v. State, 306 So.2d 104, 108 (Fla.1974), receded from on other grounds, Butterworth v. Fluellen, 389 So.2d 968 (Fla.1980). We affirm Mr. Schultz's conviction for armed burglary, the subject of his first two issues. However, we reluctantly conclude that we are required to reverse Mr. Schultz's conviction for grand theft because of our supreme court's rationale and holding in Marrero v. State, 71 So.3d 881 (Fla.2011), as discussed in this court's opinion in Colletti v. State, 74 So.3d 497 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011). The application of this precedent to the facts established on the record of this case requires a determination that the minimum value necessary to establish grand theft was not met. Accordingly, we vacate the conviction for that offense and direct that a conviction for petit theft of the first degree be entered. On remand, Mr. Schultz shall be resentenced accordingly.

§ 812.014(2)(e).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.

SILBERMAN, C.J., and BLACK, J., Concur.


Summaries of

Schultz v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Feb 1, 2013
105 So. 3d 1280 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

vacating conviction for grand theft and remanding for conviction for first-degree petit theft

Summary of this case from Mitchell v. State
Case details for

Schultz v. State

Case Details

Full title:Michael SCHULTZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Date published: Feb 1, 2013

Citations

105 So. 3d 1280 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

Citing Cases

Schultz v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.

Schultz appealed his conviction, and the Florida Second District Court of Appeal affirmed his armed-burglary…

Mitchell v. State

Here, the evidence of value only supports a conviction for first-degree petit theft. See§ 812.014(2)(e)…