KENNETH AARON GRAHAM, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Sentencing For Multiple Offenses cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant challenges his convictions and sentences for possession of more than 20 grams of cannabis and possession of cannabis with intent to sell, because both offenses were premised on his possession of the same quantity of cannabis at the same time and place. Appellee concedes that, although appellant cannot challenge his convictions for these two offenses because he did not raise the issue below, he can raise the sentencing issue, citing Perrin v. State, 599 So. 2d 1365 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) and Wright v. State, 573 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Appellee further concedes sentencing appellant for both offenses in the circumstances of this case violates the prohibition against double jeopardy, and we agree. See Lundy v. State, 596 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). Therefore, the sentence for possession of more than 20 grams of cannabis is vacated. The convictions and sentences are affirmed in all other respects.
JOANOS, KAHN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mylock v. Champion Int'l & Sedgwick Claims Mgmt., 906 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…claimant treatment. The judge apparently considered the lack of communication to claimant’s attending physician critical to a determination of claimant’s entitlement to attorney fees. In support of his decision, the JCC cited Pardo v. Denny’s, Inc., 631 So. 2d 388 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), wherein this court concluded that because the carrier had not notified a physician of claimant’s request for medical services within 21 days after the filing of same, the carrier was required to pay claimant’s attorney fees, pur…
-
Watson Grene v. State, 702 So. 2d 510 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)…reversing the conviction, as well as the sentence, for possession of a controlled substance. The cause is remanded for resentencing in accordance with the panel opinion, as modified by this opinion. We certify direct conflict with Graham v. State, 631 So. 2d 388 (Fla.1st DCA 1994); Perrin v. State, 599 So. 2d 1365, 1365-66 (Fla.1st DCA 1992); and Wright v. State, 573 So. 2d 998, 1000 (Fla.1st DCA 1991). Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith; direct con…1 / 3
-
Austin v. State, 699 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)…tutes fundamental error and that both the convictions and sentences may be attacked for the first time on appeal. For the reasons explained below, we recede from the line of cases on which the state relies, including Perrin; Wright; Graham v. State, 631 So. 2d 388 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Kio v. State, 624 So. 2d 744 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993), review denied, 634 So. 2d 627 (Fla.1994); and Salgat v. State, 630 So. 2d 1143 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993), review denied, 652 So. 2d 815 (Fla.1995), to the extent that they hold that pu…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Lundy v. State, 596 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)
- Wright v. State, 573 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Perrin v. State, 599 So. 2d 1365 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)