Juan Bridon v. the State of Florida

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed April 9, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

No. 3D24-0390 Lower Tribunal No. B23-15795

Juan Bridon, Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida, Appellee.

An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Cristina Rivera Correa, Judge.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Maria Lauredo, Chief Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Daniel Colmenares, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before EMAS, FERNANDEZ and MILLER, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Morris v. State, 721 So. 2d 725, 726-27 (Fla. 1998) (finding that a motion for judgment of acquittal can be made at the close of the State’s evidence, and in order to preserve the issue for appeal, the defendant is not required to renew the motion after the defendant has presented evidence); Morissette v. United States, 342 U.S. 246, 255-56 (1952) (stating that a certain class of “public welfare offenses” do not require intent); State v. Gruen, 586 So. 2d 1280, 1281 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (“[C]rimes proscribing conduct not prohibited at common law or crimes ‘mala prohibita’, which usually result from neglect, do not require any criminal intent.”).