DERRICK COLLINS, 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.
Dual convictions for armed robbery and grand theft, and for armed robbery and aggravated assault, do not violate the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy under the amended statute.
Appellant was convicted of armed robbery, grand theft, and aggravated assault. The offenses occurred after a statutory amendment to Florida's double j…
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 Blockburger Test cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm appellant’s convictions and sentences arising from an armed robbery. We write to expressly reject appellant’s claims that his dual convictions for armed robbery and grand theft as well for armed robbery and aggravated assault violate double jeopardy.
The acts which gave rise to the charged offenses occurred subsequent to the effective date of the statutory amendment to section 775.021(4), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1988), and therefore appellant’s reliance upon Ca-rawan v. State, 515 So. 2d 161 (Fla.1987), is misplaced. The effect of the statutory amendment is to return the law of double jeopardy to its pre-Carawan state, when the Blockburger1 analysis controlled. See Scarpillo v. State, 576 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). A comparison of the statutory elements of armed robbery and grand theft reveal that each requires an element that the other does not, suggesting that the legislature intended dual convictions. See § 812.014, Fla.Stat. (Supp.1988); § 812.13, Fla.Stat. (1987); see also Blockburger, Further, in State v. Baker, 452 So. 2d 927 (Fla.1984), a gm-Carawan decision, the supreme court expressly found that dual convictions for both armed robbery and aggravated assault were proper. See also Brown v. State, 569 So. 2d 1320 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (dual convictions for armed robbery and aggravated assault proper under statutory amendment to § 775.021(4)).
Accordingly, we hold that under section 775.021(4), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1988), dual convictions for armed robbery and grand theft as well as for armed robbery and aggravated assault do not violate the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy. We find no merit in appellant’s other points on appeal.
AFFIRMED.
ANSTEAD and DELL, JJ., and WALDEN, JAMES H., Senior Judge, concur. . Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sanders v. State, 621 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…a.1988). . See State v. Glenn, 558 So. 2d 4 (Fla.1990); Garcia v. State, 476 So. 2d 170 (Fla.1985); Owens v. State, 475 So. 2d 1238 (Fla.1985); State v. Baker, 452 So. 2d 927 (Fla.1984); State v. Gibson, 452 So. 2d 553 (Fla.1984); Collins v. State, 577 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Brown v. State, 569 So. 2d 1320 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Burton v. State, 522 So. 2d 88 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); Parker v. State, 482 So. 2d 576 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). Only Royal, which was decided just before Sanders’ appeal became final…
-
Sirmons v. State, 603 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)…raised by Johnson, we conclude that Rodriquez II controls the question whether there can be dual convictions of robbery and grand theft auto for a forceful taking of an automobile from another. We note that we are in good company. Collins v. State, 577 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 4th DCA1991); see also Huston v. State, 557 So. 2d 887, 887 (Fla. 4th DCA1990) (Anstead, J., concurring specially).3 The judgment and sentences are affirmed. AFFIRMED. HARRIS and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur. . Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.…
-
Jackson v. State, 587 So. 2d 1168 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…ny included in the robbery. See State v. Rodriquez, 500 So. 2d 120 (Fla.1986). We disagree, however, that appellant could not be convicted of both armed robbery and aggravated assault. See State v. Baker, 452 So. 2d 927 (Fla.1984); Collins v. State, 577 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). We also agree with the state, in its cross appeal, that the trial court erred in its application of the sentencing provisions of the habitual offender statute. Taylor v. State, 589 So. 2d 919 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). Contra Henry v.…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (U.S. 1932)
- Dion Michael Carawan v. State, 515 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1987)
- State v. Baker, 452 So. 2d 927 (Fla. 1984)
- Brown v. State, 569 So. 2d 1320 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Lincoln Babun v. State, 576 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)