Case Name: Robert Chester KEEN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1976-06-22
Citations: 335 So. 2d 583
Docket Number: No. 75-1729
Parties: Robert Chester KEEN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before PEARSON, HENDRY and HAVERFIELD, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 335
Pages: 583–583

Head Matter:
Robert Chester KEEN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 75-1729.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
June 22, 1976.
Rehearing Denied Aug. 11, 1976.
Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Yale T. Freeman, Special Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and William Grodnick, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.
Before PEARSON, HENDRY and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Defendant claims that the evidence upon which he was found guilty by a jury of breaking and entering with intent to commit grand larceny was legally insufficient because it was circumstantial and did not preclude the reasonableness of his own explanation for his presence at the scene. A review of the evidence not only shows glaring inconsistencies in defendant's story, but also completely fails to explain his exit from the house with a pillowcase filled with articles which the jury could reasonably have believed were removed from the premises. See Hernandez v. State, Fla.App.1974, 305 So.2d 211.
Affirmed.