TWANDA L. KEY, APPELLANT,
v.
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.
Twanda Key appeals her convictions for possession of cocaine with intent to sell and sale of cocaine, arguing that the dual convictions violate double jeopardy because they arise from a single act. The court applied controlling precedent from Gordon v. State to hold that both convictions cannot stand for the same item of cocaine.
The dual convictions violate double jeopardy protections and cannot both stand for the same item of cocaine. The trial court must vacate one conviction and recalculate the recommended guidelines sentence. The court costs were imposed without statutory authority and in violation of due process notice requirements. The attorney's fees lien must be corrected to match the oral pronouncement.
[1] Double jeopardy prohibits punishing a defendant for both possession with intent to sell and sale of cocaine when both offenses involve the same item of cocaine.
[2] A conviction for possession with intent to sell and sale of cocaine, arising from the same act, violates double jeopardy principles.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the double jeopardy clauses of the federal and Florida constitutions prohibit punishing a defendant for the offenses of possession with intent to sell and sale of cocaine, both of which involved the same item of cocaine”
Establishes the controlling legal standard that multiple convictions for these overlapping offenses cannot be sustained when based on the same cocaine
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKey transferred two pieces of rock cocaine to undercover police officers in exchange for fifty dollars. She was convicted of both possession of cocain…
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 Multiple Punishments For The Same Offense cases and more on FLexlaw
PARKER, Judge.
Key appeals from her judgment and sentences for possession of cocaine with intent to sell and sale of cocaine predicated upon a single act.1 Key challenges the convictions and sentences primarily on double jeopardy grounds, asserting that they have resulted in her receiving multiple punishments for the same offense. The precise offenses underlying Key’s convictions were recently reviewed by this court under a similar double jeopardy challenge in Gordon v. State, 528 So. 2d 910 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). In deciding this appeal, we find Gordon to be controlling. In Gordon, we held that the double jeopardy clauses of the federal and Florida constitutions prohibit punishing a defendant for the offenses of possession with intent to sell and sale of cocaine, both of which involved the same item of cocaine. Id. In accordance with Gordon, we remand the case to the trial court with instructions to vacate one of the two convictions and for a recalculation of Key’s recommended guidelines sentence absent the vacated conviction.
We further find error in the trial court’s imposition of court costs at the sentencing hearing without providing any statutory authority for the costs. Aultman v. State, 515 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). Such statutory support is also not included in the written judgment. Under these circumstances, the indigent defendant was not provided the required notice under Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla.1984), and opportunity to be heard and object. Ault-man.
Lastly, as conceded by the state, the sentencing judge orally imposed a lien for attorney’s fees in the amount of $350 while the judgment reflects a $355 lien for attorney’s fees. The judgment should, therefore, be corrected to conform with the trial court’s pronouncement.
Accordingly, we remand the case to the trial court for proceedings in conformity with this opinion.
Affirmed in part; vacated in part; remanded.
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur. . The factual circumstances surrounding this case involved an exchange, whereby Key transferred two pieces of rock cocaine to undercover police officers and in return received fifty dollars.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 1984)
- Gordon v. State, 528 So. 2d 910 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)
- Aultman v. State, 515 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)