MYRON MORALES, 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.
Defendant Morales was convicted of both shooting into an occupied vehicle and unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a felony based on the same act. The court reversed the firearm possession conviction as violating double jeopardy, holding that a defendant cannot be convicted of possessing a firearm while committing a felony when the underlying felony itself involves the use of a firearm.
A defendant may not be convicted of possession of a firearm while engaged in a felony when the underlying felony involves the use of a firearm, as this violates double jeopardy rights. The multiple trigger pulls do not constitute separate acts where the information charging Morales indicated only one act and the jury convicted him without additional comment distinguishing multiple acts.
[1] A defendant may not be convicted of possession of a firearm while engaged in a felony when the underlying felony involves the use of a firearm.
[2] A defendant cannot be convicted of two offenses arising from the same act that violate double jeopardy rights.
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“a defendant may not be convicted of possession of a firearm while engaged in a felony when the underlying felony involves the use of a firearm”
Establishes the core double jeopardy principle controlling the court's decision
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMyron Morales was charged with and convicted of shooting into an occupied vehicle in violation of Florida Statute § 790.19 and unlawful possession of …
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 Shooting Into An Occupied Vehicle cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Defendant Myron Morales appeals his convictions for shooting into an occupied vehicle, § 790.19, Fla.Stat. (1987), and unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense, § 790.07, Fla. Stat. (1987). We agree with the defendant that the two convictions for the same act violate his double jeopardy rights. See Carawan v. State, 515 So. 2d 161 (Fla.1987).1 As has been stated in many recent opinions, a defendant may not be convicted of possession of a firearm while engaged in a felony when the underlying felony involves the use of a firearm. Hall v. State, 517 So. 2d 678 (Fla.1988) (underlying felony of armed robbery); Smith v. State, 539 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (second-degree murder with a firearm); Ellison v. State, 538 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989) (aggravated assault with a firearm); Pastor v. State, 536 So. 2d 356 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (attempted first-degree murder with a deadly weapon); Hurd v. State, 536 So. 2d 361 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (aggravated battery by use of a deadly weapon).
The State contends that this appeal is not controlled by these cases because Morales pulled the trigger of the gun several times, and therefore each conviction was for a separate “act.” We reject this contention, since there was no indication in the information charging Morales that he was being accused of more than one act, and the jury, without additional comment, convicted Morales of “shooting into an occupied vehicle” and “unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a felony.” The State may not now claim, for the first time, that the two convictions were for separate acts.2 The conviction for possession of a firearm while engaged in a felony is reversed. The conviction for shooting into an occupied vehicle is affirmed but, because the improper conviction increased the guidelines sentence, the trial court shall resen-tence the defendant.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
. Since the act for which Morales was convicted was committed before July 1, 1988, Carawan and its progeny — rather than chapter 88-131, section 7, Laws of Florida — are controlling. See Smith v. State, 539 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Heath v. State, 532 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988).
. Even if the events of this case were treated as multiple acts, the underlying issue would be whether each such act could simultaneously support convictions for both crimes.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Smith v. State, 548 So. 2d 755 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)…41 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Joseph v. State, 547 So. 2d 249 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Jones v. State, 546 So. 2d 126 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Holsey v. State, 544 So. 2d 342 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Gonzalez v. State, 543 So. 2d 386 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Morales v. State, 541 So. 2d 1289 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Anderson v. State, 541 So. 2d 797 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Mozqueda v. State, 541 So. 2d 777 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Ahlberg v. State, 541 So. 2d 775 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Dowding v. State, 541 So. 2d 771 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Barnes v. State…
-
Holsey v. State, 544 So. 2d 342 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…rm while committing a criminal offense must be vacated. See Smith v. State, 539 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Brown v. State, 538 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Henderson v. State, 526 So. 2d 743 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). See generally Morales v. State, 541 So. 2d 1289 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). The conviction of attempted second-degree murder is therefore affirmed. The conviction and sentence for possession of a [*343] firearm while engaged in a criminal offense are vacated. . The charge of attempted second-degree…
Authorities Cited
- Dion Michael Carawan v. State, 515 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1987)
- Hall v. State, 517 So. 2d 678 (Fla. 1988)
- Heath v. State, 532 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)
- Smith v. State, 539 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- Pastor v. State, 536 So. 2d 356 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- State v. Forbes, 536 So. 2d 356 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Ellison v. State, 538 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- Hurd v. State, 536 So. 2d 361 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)