OLIVER v. STATE (2025)

Affirmed. See Garcia v. State, 373 So. 3d 1213, 1223 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (“In moving for a judgment of acquittal, the defendant ‘admits not only the facts stated in the evidence adduced, but also admits every conclusion favorable to the [State] that a jury might fairly and reasonably infer ․ The [trial court] should not grant a motion for judgment of acquittal unless the evidence is such that no view which the jury may lawfully take of it favorable to the [State] can be sustained under the law.’ ” (quoting Lynch v. State, 293 So. 2d 44, 45 (Fla. 1974))); Gilbert v. State, 347 So. 2d 1087, 1088 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977) (“[W]here the circumstances were such as to ordinarily induce fear in the mind of a reasonable man, then the victim may be found to be in fear, and actual fear need not be strictly and precisely shown.”); H.R. v. State, 298 So. 3d 1217, 1224 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (“[T]he fundamental error exception does not permit appellate review of unpreserved error in the State's evidentiary failure to prove the crime/delinquent act unless the evidence failed to establish the commission of any crime/delinquent act whatsoever.”).

PER CURIAM.