State v. Nesta, 617 So. 2d 720 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). · Go Syfert
Search
State v. Nesta, 617 So. 2d 720 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“one who attempts to sell or sells stolen goods to a pawnbroker is not using the stolen items for his own personal use but has met the statutory requirements for dealing in stolen property.”
5 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Blackmon v. State (fla, 2013-08-29)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Blackmon v. State
Fla. · 2013 · signal: see also · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
one who attempts to sell or sells stolen goods to a pawnbroker is not using the stolen items for his own personal use but has met the statutory requirements for dealing in stolen property.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Rodriguez v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
You heard about his farm, his equipment and he was using it." (Emphasis added.) On appeal, the State acknowledges that although there was no evidence that Rodriguez sold the herbicide to another person, Rodriguez trafficked by using the herbicide for a commercial farming project and thereby placing it "into the stream of commerce." State v. Nesta, 617 So. 2d 720, 721 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993) (holding that the sale of stolen jewelry to pawn broker constituted dealing in stolen property notwithstanding defendant's argument that he stole the jewelry for personal use and did not intend to place it into …
discussed Cited "see" Allwine v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Nesta, 617 So.2d 720 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993) (holding that, "[o]ne who attempts to sell or sells stolen goods to a pawnbroker is not using the stolen items for his own personal use but has met the statutory requirements for dealing in stolen property."); accord State v. Holcomb, 627 So.2d 127, 127-28 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993) ("We, likewise, find no merit in Holcomb's argument in the instant case that he did not deal in stolen property because when he pawned the stolen goods, he simply obtained a loan or entered into a conditional sales agreement that allowed him to repay the money received …
STATE of Florida, Appellant,
v.
Darren James NESTA, Appellee.
91-04222.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Feb 26, 1993.
617 So. 2d 720
Per Curiam.
Cited by 4 opinions  |  Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 83%
Citer courts: District Court of Appeal of Fl… (1)

[*721] Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Davis G. Anderson, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellant.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Cecilia A. Traina, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellee, Darren James Nesta, was charged with dealing in stolen property under section 812.019, Florida Statutes (1991). Appellee admitted stealing jewelry and selling it to a pawnbroker. He allegedly committed these acts to obtain money to buy food and intended to repurchase the items from the pawn shop. The trial court granted his motion to dismiss based on his argument that he had not violated the statute because he stole the item for his own personal use and did not intend to place the stolen property into the stream of commerce.

We agree with the state that the charge should not have been dismissed. One who attempts to sell or sells stolen goods to a pawnbroker is not using the stolen items for his own personal use but has met the statutory requirements for dealing in stolen property. State v. Camp, 579 So.2d 763 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), approved, 596 So.2d 1055 (Fla. 1992); Bailey v. State, 559 So.2d 742 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). We reverse and remand for reinstatement of the charge.

Reversed and remanded.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER and HALL, JJ., concur.