Case ID: so2d_631/html/0359-02.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

E.V.V., a juvenile, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 93-1542.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Feb. 8, 1994.
    Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Amy D. Ronner, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, and Phyllis M. Devitt and Loubna W. Haddad, Certified Legal Interns, for appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Richard L. Polin, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Keith S. Kromash, Certified Legal Intern, for ap-pellee.
    Before COPE, GERSTEN and GODERICH, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

E.V.V. appeals an order adjudicating him delinquent for theft. We conclude (a) that there was no violation of the best evidence rule, § 90.952, Fla.Stat. (1991); (b) that there was no abuse of discretion with respect to the Richardson hearing; (c) that there was no Brady violation, see Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51, 109 S.Ct. 333, 102 L.Ed.2d 281 (1988); and (d) that the motion for judgment of acquittal was properly denied.

Affirmed. 
      
      . Richardson v. State, 246 So.2d 771 (Fla.1971).
     
      
      . Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963).