Sangster v. State
Sangster v. State
112 So. 3d 143; 2013 WL 1909028; 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 7467
(Southern Reporter, Third Series)
Sangster v. State
Opinion of the Court
AFFIRMED. See F.B. v. State, 852 So.2d 226, 230 (Fla. 2003) (holding that, with two exceptions, a defendant must preserve a claim of insufficiency of the evidence through a timely challenge in the trial court); see also State v. Adkins, 96 So.3d 412, 423 (Fla. 2012) (holding that the Legislature’s decision to make the absence of knowledge of the illicit nature of a controlled substance an affirmative defense rather than an element of Florida’s drug offenses was constitutional).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.