SILAS GRANT, 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.
Silas Grant was convicted of trafficking in cocaine and conspiracy to traffic in cocaine, receiving a 15-year mandatory minimum sentence. On appeal, Grant challenged the disjunctive pleading in the charging document, the sufficiency of evidence, jury instructions, and raised ineffective assistance of counsel claims, all of which the court rejected.
The disjunctive pleading was not defective because Florida law permits such charging and Grant was not misled or prejudiced. The evidence was sufficient to support the trafficking conviction based on Grant's initiation of the purchase, the taped conversations, the vehicle registration, and his display and handling of money. The jury instruction challenge was not properly preserved for review due to lack of contemporaneous specific objection. The ineffective assistance of counsel claim does not appear in the record and must be raised via Rule 3.850.
[1] A charging document may allege offenses in the disjunctive under Florida law.
[2] A motion to quash or dismiss based on a disjunctive pleading defect will not be granted unless the information is so vague or indistinct as to mislead or embarrass the de…
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“Plainly, section 893.-135(l)(b)(l), Florida Statutes (1991) provides that a person may be charged in the disjunctive.”
Establishes the legal authority permitting disjunctive pleadings in trafficking charges
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGrant was charged with trafficking in cocaine and conspiracy to traffic in cocaine. The charging document alleged he was in actual or constructive pos…
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 Possession (Actual And Constructive) cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendant was charged with trafficking in cocaine and conspiracy to traffic in cocaine, in which he was found guilty on both charges and sentenced to a minimum mandatory term of fifteen years on each count to run concurrently.
The appellant claims that he was impermissibly charged with a disjunctive pleading because the charging document alleged he “was knowingly in actual or constructive possession of and/or did knowingly purchase 400 or more grams of cocaine_” Plainly, section 893.-135(l)(b)(l), Florida Statutes (1991) provides that a person may be charged in the disjunctive. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.140(k)(5) permits alternative or disjunctive allegations of this nature and Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.140(o) provides that no motion to quash or dismiss for such a defect shall be granted unless the court finds the information so vague or indistinct as to mislead or embarrass the defendant in preparation of a defense. In this ease, a reading of the information discloses that the defendant was not prejudiced or misled because the trafficking with which he was charged is one which could plainly be accomplished by one or more of several means, so that it was not a defective disjunctive pleading. State v. Fernandez, 546 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); State v. Mena, 471 So. 2d 1297 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985).
We similarly reject the appellant’s contention that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for trafficking in cocaine. In this case, it was the defendant who initiated the first cocaine purchase which was buttressed by taped telephone conversations of the would-be purchasers. A rental ear agreement discloses that the vehicle which was used in the transaction and was later confiscated was listed in the defendant’s name. Moreover, the defendant’s money was displayed during the transaction and he assisted in counting it. Next, the defendant’s challenge to certain submitted jury instructions was not preserved for review by a contemporaneous specific objection.
Finally, defendant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel does not facially appear in the record of the cause. Consequently, we affirm his conviction without prejudice to him to present such a claim to the trial court via Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.
Affirmed without prejudice.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Takoya Criner v. State, 943 So. 2d 224 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…s ineffective assistance on direct appeal. The grounds raised all concern strategic decisions made by defense counsel. As the claims of ineffective assistance are not apparent on the face of the record, we decline to review them. See Grant v. State, 622 So. 2d 186, 187 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). The convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED. KAHN, BENTON, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.…
-
Eliseo G. Saldana v. State, 980 So. 2d 1220 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)…indistinct as to embarrass or mislead the defen [*1222] dant in preparing his defense. Here, the information could not prejudice or mislead Mr. Saldana; any of the three alternative incidents would constitute the charged offense. See Grant v. State, 622 So. 2d 186, 186-87 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). Therefore, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to dismiss. We also conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Mr. Saldana’s motion for a statement of particulars;…
-
Robinson v. State, 661 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…es, the fact that a legal issue was briefed on direct appeal does not preclude a posteonviction claim that trial counsel handled the issue ineffectively during the trial. See, e.g., Green v. State, 642 So. 2d 847 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Grant v. State, 622 So. 2d 186 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1993). Indeed, it is possible for a direct appeal to result in an affirmance because trial counsel failed to properly preserve the issue for direct appeal. Steinhorst v. State, 412 So. 2d 332 (Fla.1982). Moreover, our file from the dir…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Carmelo O. Mena, 471 So. 2d 1297 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
- M.J. v. State, 546 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- State v. Davis, 546 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)