ORETELIO DEJESUS FUENTES, 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.
Oretelio DeJesus Fuentes was convicted of trafficking, delivery, and possession of cocaine from a single transaction involving a half-pound drug sale. The appellate court reversed, holding that convicting a defendant of trafficking, delivery, and possession arising from a single act violates double jeopardy principles.
A defendant may not be convicted of trafficking, delivery, and possession of cocaine arising from a single act. Such multiple convictions constitute multiple punishment for the same act and violate double jeopardy. The trial court must vacate all but one of the three convictions and recalculate the sentence accordingly.
[1] A defendant may not be convicted of both delivery and possession of a controlled substance predicated on a single underlying act.
[2] Convicting a defendant of trafficking, delivery, and possession arising from a single act constitutes a double jeopardy violation.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“It is now well established that a defendant may not be convicted of both delivery and possession of cocaine predicated on a single underlying act.”
Establishes the foundational double jeopardy principle prohibiting multiple convictions for possession and delivery from a single transaction.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant and three others were arrested during the sale of a half pound of cocaine to undercover Tampa police detectives. Appellant had transported 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 Downward Departure From Sentencing Guidelines cases and more on FLexlaw
RYDER, Judge.
Appellant was convicted and sentenced for trafficking in cocaine, delivery of cocaine, possession of cocaine and conspiracy to traffic in cocaine. He appeals only from the trafficking, delivery and possession convictions and sentences on double jeopardy grounds. We reverse.
Appellant and three other individuals were arrested while in the act of selling a half pound of cocaine to undercover detectives of the Tampa Police Department. Appellant had transported the contraband from Miami and an undercover detective observed him driving by the house where the drugs were being sold asking one of his confederates if the deal had gone through yet. The four arrestees were named in each of the four counts of the information filed by appellee. Appellant was adjudicated guilty as charged.
The trial court, prior to the Florida Supreme Court’s decision in Carawan v. State, 515 So. 2d 161 (Fla.1987), sentenced appellant to concurrent terms of nine years’ imprisonment for the trafficking, delivery and conspiracy to traffic charges and five years for the possession charge. The sentences were to be suspended after five years and followed by two years of community control and two years of probation. The court also imposed the mandatory min imum term of five years and an accompanying fine of $100,000.00 for trafficking and conspiracy to traffic. The trial court entered an order of mitigating circumstances departing downward from the recommended sentencing guidelines. The order cited appellant’s distinguished military service, his lack of a criminal record and strong support from his relatives and friends as factors justifying the downward departure.
It is now well established that a defendant may not be convicted of both delivery and possession of cocaine predicated on a single underlying act. See Gordon v. State, 528 So. 2d 910 (Fla.2nd DCA 1988). It is also a double jeopardy violation to convict a defendant of trafficking, delivery and possession arising from a single act. Campbell v. State, 517 So. 2d 696 (Fla.2nd DCA 1987). Gordon and Campbell were decided by this court under the authority of Carawan, in which the Florida Supreme Court set forth the method of analyzing multiple convictions to determine whether a double jeopardy violation has occurred.
Without reiterating the Carawan analysis, which has been so often repeated in recent case law, we find that appellant’s convictions and sentences for trafficking, delivery and possession constitute multiple punishment for the same act. We must therefore reverse and remand to the trial court with directions to vacate all but one of the three convictions for trafficking, delivery and possession and recalculate the sentence for the remaining conviction.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
SCHEB, A.C.J., and PARKER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gelsey v. State, 565 So. 2d 876 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)…powder cocaine. Once the exchange was completed, Gelsey was arrested. Gelsey contends that since the offense of delivery is subsumed in the trafficking charge, to also convict him of delivery constitutes double jeopardy. He cites Fuentes v. State, 533 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1988), for the proposition that one may not be convicted of both trafficking and delivery in a single transaction. The facts of this case make Fuentes inapplicable. While it is true Gelsey could not be convicted of both delivering and…
-
Adolf Alvin Mincey v. State, 563 So. 2d 811 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)…derlying act, we agree that the appellant was improperly convicted and sentenced for both charges. State v. Burton, 555 So. 2d 1210 (Fla.1989); State v. Smith, 547 So. 2d 613 (Fla.1989); Carawan v. State, 515 So. 2d 161 (Fla.1987); Fuentes v. State, 533 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). We also agree with the appellant’s contention that the court improperly departed from the guidelines when sentencing him. All of the reasons given by the trial court to support an upward departure from the guidelines were either…
-
Isaac v. State, 543 So. 2d 1293 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)…le undivided quantity of cocaine based upon the second drug transaction. A defendant may not be convicted of delivery and possession of cocaine predicated on a single underlying act. See Carawan v. State, 515 So. 2d 161 (Fla.1987); Fuentes v. State, 533 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Gordon v. State, 528 So. 2d [*1294] 910 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). Accordingly, the judgment and sentence for possession of cocaine must be set aside on the grounds that it constitutes multiple punishment for the same act. We, therefore…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Dion Michael Carawan v. State, 515 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1987)
- Gordon v. State, 528 So. 2d 910 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)
- Campbell v. State, 517 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- State v. Delaney, 517 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)