Case ID: so3d_36/html/0882-01.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

Michael Carl HARRIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 5D08-3926.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    June 4, 2010.
    James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Leonard R. Ross, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
    Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Carmen F. Corrente, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Ap-pellee.
   PER CURIAM.

Michael Carl Harris appeals his judgment and sentence for delivery of cocaine. He argues that the State failed to prove the element of knowledge. We affirm. When person # 1 asks person # 2 for crack cocaine, person # 2 directs person # 3 to hand over a substance, and person # 3 hands over a substance that later tests positive for cocaine, the reasonable inference is that person # 2 had knowledge that the substance was cocaine, especially if person # 2 asks person # 1 if they are with the police and thereafter flees upon arrival of law enforcement.

AFFIRMED.

GRIFFIN, ORFINGER and COHEN, JJ., concur.