KARDELL VERNON SLATER, 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.
Conviction for burglary with battery affirmed, but separate battery conviction reversed as violating double jeopardy when the same battery constitutes an element of the burglary charge.
A conviction for simple battery violates double jeopardy principles when the defendant is simultaneously convicted of burglary with battery based on the same battery conduct.
[1] A defendant cannot be separately convicted of simple battery and burglary with battery when both charges arise from the same battery conduct, as the separate battery conv…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was charged with and convicted of both burglary with battery and simple battery arising from the same factual event.…
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 Burglary With A Battery cases and more on FLexlaw
ORFINGER, Judge.
Appellant was charged with and convicted of burglary with a battery (section 810.-02(2)(a)) and simple battery (section 784.03, Florida Statutes (1987)). Both battery charges arise out of the same factual event. We rejected the Anders
brief filed by appellant’s counsel and required the filing of a supplemental brief directed to the question of whether appellant’s double jeopardy rights were adversely affected by the additional charge of battery, when that same battery was an inherent element of the burglary charge. Appellant now asserts, and appellee concedes, that this issue is controlled by our recent decision in Bradley v. State, 540 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989) in which we held that a conviction for battery violates double jeopardy principles when the defendant is also charged with and convicted of burglary with a battery, when the battery in both charges is the same. The conviction for burglary with a battery is affirmed. The separate conviction for battery is reversed and the sentence for that misdemeanor is vacated. Defendant’s sentence on the burglary count is not affected by the reversal of the battery conviction.
AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED in part.
COWART and DANIEL, JJ., concur. . Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lewis v. State, 740 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)…urglary with a battery, and the battery is the same in both charges. See Crawford v. State, 662 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Febles v. State, 654 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); Watson v. State, 646 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Slater v. State, 543 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Bradley v. State, 540 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). Defendant’s convictions and sentences on counts 3, 5, and 6 are hereby vacated. This cause is remanded for re-sentencing. The order denying relief is affirmed on all other…
-
Febles v. State, 654 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)…urglary with an assault, simple assault, criminal mischief and battery. In light of the conviction for burglary with an assault, his conviction for simple assault arising out of the same incident was a double jeopardy violation. See Slater v. State, 543 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Smith v. State, 541 So. 2d 1275 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Bradley v. State, 540 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). We therefore affirm the appellant’s conviction for burglary with an assault but reverse the conviction and sentence for t…
-
Harrison v. State, 755 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…security guard he committed a battery and by that battery converted the theft into a robbery. These two convictions cannot stand, so the battery conviction must be vacated. See Crawford v. State, 662 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Slater v. State, 543 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). Because the charge of robbery in this case alleges the taking “and subsequent to said taking in a continuous series of acts or events with said taking [he] did use forcé violence, assault, or putting in fear” and because the jur…
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
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Bradley v. State, 540 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)