JOSE MAQUIERA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A defendant cannot be convicted and sentenced as both a principal and an accessory after the fact for the same offense.
Appellant was convicted of attempted murder, attempted armed robbery, and accessory after the fact to attempted armed robbery. The appeal challenges t…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Principal Offender cases and more on FLexlaw
FERGUSON, Judge.
Appellant seeks review of judgments and sentences for attempted murder, attempted armed robbery and accessory after the fact to attempted armed robbery.
The single issue of merit in this appeal challenges the adjudication of the defendant as both a principal and an accessory after the fact in the commission of an attempted robbery. We hold that he may not be convicted and sentenced for both offenses.
Section 777.03, Florida Statutes (1985) provides:
Whoever ... maintains or assists the principal or accessory before the fact, or gives the offender any other aid, knowing that he had committed a felony or been accessory thereto before the fact, with intent that he shall avoid or escape detection, arrest, trial or punishment, shall be deemed an accessory after the fact_(emphasis supplied).
See Gawronski v. State, 444 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (to prove offense of accessory after the fact to attempted robbery, state must prove that defendant maintained, assisted, or gave aid to principal, knowing that principal had committed attempted robbery with intent that principal avoid or escape detection, arrest, trial, or punishment); see also 1 C. Torcia, Wharton’s Criminal Law § 33 (14th ed. 1978) (an accessory after the fact renders aid to a felon after the underlying felony has been completed).
In legal and logical contemplation, as to a single offense of attempted robbery, the principal offender and the person giving aid to the offender afterwards cannot be one and the same.
The conviction and sentence for accessory after the fact is reversed. Otherwise we affirm.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Staten v. State, 519 So. 2d 622 (Fla. 1988)…BARKETT, Justice. We have for review Staten v. State, 500 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), which conflicts with Maguiera v. State, 494 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. The issue is whether petitioner was improperly adjudicated and sentenced as a principal and as an accessory after the fact based on the same criminal act. We find that petitio…
-
Staten v. State, 500 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)…each of the charges against her constituted separate crimes because each of them required proof of a statutory element which the others did not. State v. Baker, 456 So. 2d 419 (Fla.1984). We do not find our view inconsistent with Maquiera v. State, 494 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), in which the court stated that “the principal offender and. the person giving aid to the offender afterwards cannot be one and the same.” Maquiera at 293. We read Maquiera, as involving a situation where there was only one perpet…
Authorities Cited
- Gawronski v. State, 444 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)