¶1Although the record in this matter may be susceptible of a determination that E.J.K. acted in self-defense, we are precluded from passing upon the single question before us whether the trial court erred in finding the evidence sufficient to convict E.J.K. of aggravated battery. The record does not disclose either a motion for judgment of acquittal or a motion for a new trial. Either motion would have accorded the trial court an opportunity to test the sufficiency of the evidence and preserved the contention for appellate consideration. Pursuant to State v. Barber, 301 So.2d 7 (Fla.1974), however, we are foreclosed from reviewing the evidence. See also Crenshaw v. State, 490 So.2d 1054 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).
508 So. 2d 422
508 So.2d 422
12 Fla.L.Weekly 1205
E.J.K. v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided May 8, 1987
District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1987-05-08
Relies on 301 So. 2d 7 - State v. Barber · 490 So. 2d 1054 - Crenshaw v. State
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1987-05-08
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently April 2018
12 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →