Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 11-08-2020
Case Style:
MARCELINO MACEDO v. STATE OF FLORIDA
Case Number: 19-2484
Judge: PER CURIAM
Court: DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
Plaintiff's Attorney: Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Jeffrey R. Geldens, Assistant Attorney
General
Defendant's Attorney:
OR
Just Call 855-853-4800 for Free Help Finding a Lawyer Help You.
Description:
West Palm Beach, FL - Criminal defense lawyer represented defendant MARCELINO MACEDO charged with burglary of a dwelling and grand theft of property valued at $100 or more from a dwelling or enclosed curtilage, as well as tampering with physical evidence.
While he contends that there was no probable cause to support his arrest, which requires
suppression of the evidence seized, we disagree and conclude that the
totality of the circumstances provided probable cause to detain and arrest
appellant.
Although the court erred in admitting the victim’s testimony of the
value of a watch which was taken, as it was based upon an appraisal which
was hearsay, see Harris v. State, 288 So. 3d 711 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020), any
error was harmless. The State provided sufficient competent evidence of
the value of other items taken in the burglary, particularly a power washer,
which met the statutory threshold. See, e.g., K.W. v. State, 983 So. 2d 713
(Fla. 2d DCA 2008).
Outcome: We affirm appellant’s conviction for burglary of a dwelling and grand
theft of property valued at $100 or more from a dwelling or enclosed
curtilage, as well as tampering with physical evidence
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: