I.V. v. State

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, a juvenile, appeals the denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal and his subsequent conviction of two counts of grand theft of an automobile. The evidence against appellant was sparse and entirely circumstantial. Because the state failed to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, we reverse. E.g., Newberry v. State, 442 So.2d 334 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).

REVERSED.

COBB, PETERSON and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.