Case Name: Richard Roy HIDALGO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1968-04-02
Citations: 208 So. 2d 629
Docket Number: No. 66-769
Parties: Richard Roy HIDALGO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before CHARLES CARROLL, C. J., and PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 208
Pages: 629–630

Head Matter:
Richard Roy HIDALGO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 66-769.
District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.
April 2, 1968.
Robert L. Koeppel, Public Defender, Phillip A. Hubbart and Marvin J. Emory, Jr., Asst. Public Defenders, for appellant.
Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Jesse J. McCrary, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before CHARLES CARROLL, C. J., and PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The record of appellant's conviction fails to support the judgment and sentence because of the State's failure to prove an essential element of the crime charged. See § 811.20 Fla.Stat. (1965), F.S.A. The State, in its brief and upon oral argument, recognizes the fatal deficiency. Therefore, the judgment and sentence must be reversed upon authority of the law as established in Lasher v. State, 80 Fla. 712, 86 So. 689 (1920); Farrior v. State, Fla.1954, 76 So.2d 148; Johnson v. State, Fla.App.1958, 102 So.2d 412; Patterson v. State, Fla.App.1964, 167 So.2d 766.
Reversed, with directions to discharge appellant.