Grandison v. State
Grandison v. State
926 So. 2d 447; 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 5409; 2006 WL 941955
(Southern Reporter, Second Series)
Grandison v. State
Opinion of the Court
The appellant challenges his convictions for possession of cannabis and cocaine. Because the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to prove his actual dr constructive possession of the contraband, the trial court erred by denying his motion for judgment of acquittal. See Hill v. State, 736 So.2d 133 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); see also Watson v. State, 877 So.2d 914 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004); Cruz v. State, 744 So.2d 568 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Agee v. State, 522
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.