Case ID: so2d_964/html/0902-01.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

Donald WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 5D05-4444.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Sept. 28, 2007.
    James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Dee Ball, Assistant Public Defender, Day-tona Beach, for Appellant.
    Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Lori N. Hagan, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appel-lee.
   PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See Thomas v. State, 748 So.2d 970, 983 (Fla.1999) (“A motion for a jury view may be granted if it appears that a useful purpose would be served. However, such a determination is left to the discretion of the trial judge and there is a presumption of correctness as to his rulings absent a demonstration to the contrary.”); Rosen v. State, 940 So.2d 1155, 1159 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (“If, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, a rational trier of fact could find the existence of the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, then there is sufficient evidence to sustain a conviction.”); Miller v. State, 782 So.2d 426, 430 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (holding question of proximate cause was for jury to decide).

GRIFFIN, THOMPSON and MONACO, JJ., concur.