J.N.S. v. State, 2025 Fla. App. LEXIS 9475 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2025)

The Florida 6th District Court of Appeal reversed a youth’s adjudication of grand theft of a motor vehicle based on the State’s failure to prove ownership of the car involved. The Court stated in relevant part:

“The delinquency petition charged J.N.S. with stealing Redenti’s “Nissan automobile.” But neither J.N.S.’s confession, witness testimony, nor other evidence established that Redenti’s 2017 red Nissan Sentra, stolen from its parking space at her home on May 20, 2023, was the same red Nissan Sentra police stopped on May 23 and J.N.S. confessed he took from an unknown location. There was no evidence matching the vehicle identification number (VIN) of Redenti’s stolen car and the car recovered from J.N.S. There was police testimony of the license plate number of the recovered car, but no Redenti or police testimony matching the plate to Redenti’s car. There was bodycam video of J.N.S.’s confession, but no video of the car he confessed to taking for Redenti to identify as hers. Redenti testified to observable damage to her car when it was returned to her at the police tow yard, but the only police officer to testify about damage to the car recovered from J.N.S. did not recall seeing any damage. Nor did police testify that the recovered car was taken to the tow yard where Redenti’s stolen car was returned to her.

The matching general description of the car recovered from J.N.S. to Redenti’s stolen car (color, make, and model) and the temporal proximity of the recovery to when Redenti’s car was stolen (three days) were insufficient, without additional identifying evidence, to establish the car J.N.S. took was Redenti’s stolen car—i.e., to establish the “property of another” element of the grand theft charge. See, e.g., J.A.R., 331 So. 3d at 223-24 (reversing conviction where evidence matching stolen vehicle to vehicle recovered one day later limited to “silver-gray Jeep Grand Cherokee”); V.G. v. State, 224 So. 3d 795, 798-99 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (“silver Dodge Dart” recovered one day later); Joseph v. State, 956 So. 2d 1232, 1233-34 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (“red two-door Ford Explorer” recovered two days later); see also Rossi v. State, 717 So. 2d 611, 611 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (“green Buick”); C.O. v. State, 557 So. 2d 637, 638 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (“white, four door car” recovered one day later).”