SMITH, Judge.
From the circumstantial evidence in this case the jury could properly have found that appellants are guilty of breaking and entering with intent to commit petit larceny. The more troublesome question is whether, on an information charging that appellants with requisite intent broke and entered "a certain building located at 300 W. Tharpe Street, [Tallahassee] ..., the property of Bill Peacock," appellants may be convicted on proof that the building was...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
