Case Name: J.D., a juvenile, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2018-06-20
Citations: 246 So. 3d 569
Docket Number: No. 3D17–2359
Parties: J.D., a juvenile, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before EMAS, SCALES and LUCK, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 246
Pages: 569–569

Head Matter:
J.D., a juvenile, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 3D17-2359
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Opinion filed June 20, 2018.
Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Jeffrey P. DeSousa, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Magaly Rodriguez, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before EMAS, SCALES and LUCK, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. Beasley v. State, 774 So.2d 649, 657 (Fla. 2000) (observing: "In moving for a judgment of acquittal, a defendant 'admits not only the facts stated in the evidence adduced, but also admits every conclusion favorable to the adverse party that a jury might fairly and reasonably infer from the evidence' ") (quoting Lynch v. State, 293 So.2d 44, 45 (Fla. 1974) ); State v. Rodriguez, 71 So.3d 154 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (observing that when a defendant moves for a judgment of acquittal based upon insufficiency of the evidence, all reasonable inferences and conclusions that may be drawn from the evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the State).