Juan Bridon, Appellant, v. The State of Florida, Appellee. (2025)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Juan Bridon, Appellant, v. The State of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D24-0390

Decided: April 09, 2025

Before EMAS, FERNANDEZ and MILLER, JJ.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Maria Lauredo, Chief Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Daniel Colmenares, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Affirmed. See Morris v. State, 721 So. 2d 725, 726-27 (Fla. 1998) (finding that a motion for judgment of acquittal can be made at the close of the State's evidence, and in order to preserve the issue for appeal, the defendant is not required to renew the motion after the defendant has presented evidence); Morissette v. United States, 342 U.S. 246, 255-56 (1952) (stating that a certain class of “public welfare offenses” do not require intent); State v. Gruen, 586 So. 2d 1280, 1281 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (“[C]rimes proscribing conduct not prohibited at common law or crimes ‘mala prohibita’, which usually result from neglect, do not require any criminal intent.”).

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network