Case Name: Daniel WRIGHT, Petitioner, v. The STATE of Florida, Respondent
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2001-10-24
Citations: 797 So. 2d 647
Docket Number: No. 3D01-1611
Parties: Daniel WRIGHT, Petitioner, v. The STATE of Florida, Respondent.
Judges: Before COPE, LEVY and FLETCHER, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 797
Pages: 647–648

Head Matter:
Daniel WRIGHT, Petitioner, v. The STATE of Florida, Respondent.
No. 3D01-1611.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Oct. 24, 2001.
Daniel Wright, in proper person.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Mark Rosenblatt, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
Before COPE, LEVY and FLETCHER, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We deny the petition of Daniel Wright for a writ of habeas corpus whereby he alleges that his appellate counsel was ineffective. We have taken judicial notice of the briefs in the direct appeal, Wright v. State, 759 So.2d 730 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000).
Assuming that the points were raised by a proper motion for judgment of acquittal, it is plain that the evidence was legally sufficient to go to the jury on the question of whether the defendant was correctly identified as the perpetrator of the charged crimes. The evidence regarding the offense of burglary was legally sufficient under the test outlined in Foster v. State, 220 So.2d 406 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969).
Petition denied.