Case ID: so2d_688/html/1023-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Fidel RODRIGUEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 96-1883.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    March 5, 1997.
    Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Suzanne M. Froix, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Richard L. Polin, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
    Before COPE, LEVY and FLETCHER, JJ.
   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.