WILLIAM MILLER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 1990-08-01
No. 89-1082
ANSTEAD and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., and KAHN, MARTIN D., Associate Judge, concur.
568 So. 2d 452 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1990) Positive Treatment
Cited by 35 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ANSTEAD and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., and KAHN, MARTIN D., Associate Judge, concur.

Other

We deny the motion but acknowledge that we have rejected appellant’s claim that the habitual offender statute is facially unconstitutional. Johnson v. State, 564 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Broderick v. State, 564 So. 2d 622 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By (18 total)

  • RAY v. State, 755 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 2000)
    …d in a common plan, does not participate in acts committed by his cofel-on, “which fall outside of, and are foreign to, the common design of the original collaboration.” Dell v. State, 661 So. 2d 1305, 1306 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (quoting Ward v. State, 568 So. 2d 452 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)). Under these limited circumstances, a defendant whose cofelon exceeds the scope of the original plan is exonerated from any punishment imposed as a result of the independent act. Id.See also Parker v. State, 458 So. 2d 750 (Fla.1…
  • Dell v. State, 661 So. 2d 1305 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)
    …ircumstances where, after participating in a common plan or design, one co-felon does not participate in acts, committed by another co-felon, which fall outside of, and are foreign to, the common design of the original collaboration.” Ward v. State, 568 So. 2d 452, 453 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (citing Parker v. State, 458 So. 2d 750 (Fla.1984), cert, denied 470 U.S. 1088, 105 S.Ct. 1855, 85 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985)). The thrust of this doctrine is to exonerate one defendant from acts committed outside of the original pla…
  • Chadwick Willacy v. State, 967 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 2007)
    …ed in a common plan, does not participate in acts committed by his cofelon, “which fall outside of, and are foreign to, the common design of the original collaboration.” Dell v. State, 661 So. 2d 1305, 1306 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (quoting Ward v. State, 568 So. 2d 452 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)). Under these limited circumstances, a defendant whose cofelon exceeds the scope of the original plan is exonerated from any punishment imposed as a result of the independent act. Id. at 609. Erlenbach’s choice to forego the inde…

Previewing 3 of 18 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw