evidence sufficient to make a prima facie showing that a grand theft occurred. See J.B. (finding that J.B.’s admission that the substance he possessed was “beer” was direct evidence and was sufficient to make a prima facie showing that the substance was alcoholic in nature). As Martin readily admits, the evidence clearly demonstrated that on the night he was confronted by Universal security, he had taken $171 from the till. Although there was no evidence that Martin took more than $300 from Universal other than his own statement, the amount taken in the theft relates only to the degree of the offense. It was, therefore, not necessary to independently establish this element to survive the motion for judgment of acquittal. See generally Farinas v. State, 569 So.2d 425, 430 (Fla.1990) (<HOLDING>). AFFIRMED. PLEUS, C.J. and SAWAYA, J., concur.
holding that the defendants sentence for armed burglary in violation of section 810022b was improperly enhanced pursuant to section 775087 because the use of a weapon or a firearm is an essential element of armed burglary holding that when defendant was guilty of burglary but the only evidence that he was armed was from his own statement existence of the firearm went only to the degree of the offense and was not as an element of proof holding that in a prosecution for possession of an unregistered firearm evidence of an armed robbery committed with the firearm was admissible holding that a statement implying that the defendant was guilty of the crime for which he was on trial was inadmissible hearsay holding that the application of the enhancement for using a firearm in connection with another felony offense is proper only if there is a clear connection between the firearm that was used in the other offense and the one that was used in the offense of conviction