Case ID: so2d_320/html/0870-01.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

William Charles WINDHURST, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 74-1477.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    Oct. 3, 1975.
    Rehearing Denied Nov. 12, 1975.
    Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Elliot R. Brooks and Craig Barnard, Asst. Public Defenders, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
    Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and C. Marie Bernard, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

Our consideration of the briefs and record convinces us that the appellate points posed for our consideration are without merit. See Richter v. State, 1969, 1 Tenn. Cr.App. 270, 438 S.W.2d 362, 364, and authorities cited therein.

We note however that the final judgment adjudicating appellant guilty of the crime of receiving stolen property fails to recite knowledge on the defendant’s part of the stolen character of the property. Spurlock v. State, Fla.App.1973, 281 So.2d 586.

Accordingly, the case is reversed and remanded to the trial court for entry of a proper judgment.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

CROSS, MAGER and DOWNEY, JJ., concur.