MICHAEL WHITE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1995-03-14
No. 93-2406
ERVIN, MINER and WOLF, JJ., concur.
651 So. 2d 1264 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1995)

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.

Synopsis

Michael White appeals his convictions for attempted manslaughter, unlawful discharge of a firearm on school property, and unlawful possession of a firearm on school property. The court vacated the possession conviction as duplicative of the discharge conviction under double jeopardy principles and reversed the sentencing for failure to comply with statutory requirements for adult sentencing of juveniles.


Holding

The possession conviction is vacated as duplicative of the discharge conviction because discharge necessarily includes possession of the same weapon, and the possession statute contains no elements not included in the discharge statute. The sentencing is reversed and remanded because the trial court failed to address all statutory criteria, failed to enter a written order with findings of fact and reasons, and delayed the written order 11 days after oral pronouncement.


Headnotes

[1] A conviction for discharging a firearm on school property subsumes the offense of possessing a firearm on school property, thus precluding separate convictions and senten…

[2] A trial court must make adequate contemporaneous written findings of fact and reasons when imposing adult sanctions on a juvenile offender.

Previewing 2 of 3 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

Key Quotes

“It is not possible for a person to discharge a firearm on public property without also being in possession of the same weapon.”

Establishes the logical and legal basis for finding the possession conviction duplicative of the discharge conviction under double jeopardy principles.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Michael White was convicted of attempted manslaughter, unlawful discharge of a firearm on school property, and unlawful possession of a firearm on sch…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Michael White appeals from a judgment and sentence for attempted manslaughter, unlawful discharge of a firearm on school property, and unlawful possession of a firearm on school property. Appellant raises a number of issues on appeal, only two of which have merit: (1) Whether the convictions and sentences for both possession of a firearm on school property and discharging a firearm on school property violates the prohibition against double jeopardy, and (2) whether the trial court erred in sentencing appellant as an adult without making adequate contemporaneous written findings in accordance with section 39.059(7), Florida Statutes (1993).

We find that it is not possible for a person to discharge a firearm on public property without also being in possession of the same weapon. Section 790.115(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1993), prohibiting possession of the firearm on school property, does not contain any elements not included in a violation of section 790.115(2)(d), prohibiting discharge of a firearm on school property.1 The conviction and sentence for possession of a firearm on school property are, therefore, vacated.

In imposing adult sanctions, the trial court did not address all the statutory criteria contained in section 39.059(7), Florida Statutes (1993), nor did the trial court enter a written order containing findings of fact and reasons for imposing adult sanctions. In addition, the written sentencing order was not entered until 11 days after sentence was orally pronounced. We must, therefore, reverse and remand for resentencing in accordance with the dictates of Troutman v. State, 630 So. 2d 528 (Fla.1993). See also Thompson v. State, 640 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). The convictions for attempted manslaughter and unlawful discharge of a firearm on school property are affirmed.

ERVIN, MINER and WOLF, JJ., concur. . The state charged appellant with violating section 790.115(2)(a), Florida Statutes. Subsection (2)(a) prohibits the possession of a firearm, but does not provide for a punishment. Subsection (2)(c) makes the willful and knowing possession of a firearm in violation of “this subsection” a third-degree felony. It would appear that a more appropriate charging document would refer to subsection (2)(c). It is unnecessary, however, for us to reach this issue since it was not raised by the parties. Subsection (2)(d) expressly refers to discharge of a firearm while in violation of paragraph (a), but does not mention subsection (2)(c). Even though it is not expressly stated, we presume that paragraph (c) as well as paragraph (a) is subsumed in subparagraph (2)(d).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw