JORGE HUMBERTO FEBLES, 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.
Jorge Humberto Febles appealed his convictions for burglary with assault and simple assault. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the burglary conviction but reversed the simple assault conviction as a double jeopardy violation, and remanded for resentencing and correction of the judgment form.
The court affirmed Febles's conviction for burglary with assault but reversed his conviction for simple assault as a double jeopardy violation. The court remanded for correction of the judgment form to cite the proper statute (810.02(2)(a) instead of 810.02(2)(b)) and for resentencing to allow the state to submit corroborating evidence of the federal conviction and its Florida felony equivalent.
[1] A conviction for burglary with an assault arising from the same incident as a simple assault conviction constitutes a double jeopardy violation.
[2] A judgment form must accurately reflect the statutory basis for a conviction as orally adjudicated by the court.
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“In light of the conviction for burglary with an assault, his conviction for simple assault arising out of the same incident was a double jeopardy violation.”
Establishes the core legal violation that required reversal of the simple assault conviction
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFebles was convicted of burglary with an assault, simple assault, criminal mischief, and battery. The simple assault conviction arose out of the same …
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 Simple Assault cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendant appeals from his separate convictions for burglary with an assault and simple assault, and from the sentences ordered for these convictions. Upon review of the record as well as the state’s confession of error, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for resentencing.
The appellant was convicted of burglary with an assault, simple assault, criminal mischief and battery. In light of the conviction for burglary with an assault, his conviction for simple assault arising out of the same incident was a double jeopardy violation. See Slater v. State, 543 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Smith v. State, 541 So. 2d 1275 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Bradley v. State, 540 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). We therefore affirm the appellant’s conviction for burglary with an assault but reverse the conviction and sentence for the separate count of simple assault. See State v. Barton, 523 So. 2d 152 (Fla.1988).
As to the appellant’s conviction for burglary with an assault, while we affirm the conviction, the judgment form must be cor rected. At trial, the court orally adjudicated the defendant guilty of burglary with an assault, 810.02(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1993), pursuant to the jury’s verdict. However, the judgment form incorrectly reflects a conviction for armed burglary, citing to 810.02(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1993), and we remand for correction of the judgment form to properly cite to 810.02(2)(a).
Furthermore, the trial court committed a second error at sentencing by failing to require the state to submit corroborating evidence of the appellant’s prior federal conviction and to submit evidence of that conviction’s Florida felony equivalent for sentence scoring purposes. We affirm the appellant’s conviction for burglary with an assault, but remand that count for resentencing upon production of evidence of the nature of the federal conviction and its conversion into an equivalent Florida score, necessary for a proper determination of the appellant’s sentence. See Brantley v. State, 570 So. 2d 364 (Fla. 3d DCA), dismissed, 576 So. 2d 285 (Fla.1990); Morgan v. State, 550 So. 2d 151 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). We affirm the appellant’s remaining convictions.
Accordingly, we affirm in part, reverse in part and remand.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Austin v. State, 699 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)…was sentenced to ten years as a habitual violent felony offender with five and three-year minimum mandatories. As the state properly concedes, these dual convictions and sentences violate the prohibition against double jeopardy. See Febles v. State, 654 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). Citing precedent from this court, e.g., Perrin v. State, 599 So. 2d 1365 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992), and Wright v. State, 573 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), however, the state argues that appellant is entitled only to reversal of his s…
-
Lewis v. State, 740 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)…ions. Battery convictions violate double jeopardy when defendant is also charged with and convicted of burglary with a battery, and the battery is the same in both charges. See Crawford v. State, 662 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Febles v. State, 654 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); Watson v. State, 646 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Slater v. State, 543 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Bradley v. State, 540 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). Defendant’s convictions and sentences on counts 3, 5, and 6 are hereby…
-
Irizarry v. State, 905 So. 2d 160 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)…DCA 2000); Billiot v. State, 711 So. 2d 1277 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). Finally, the defendant’s reliance on this Court’s opinions in Torna v. State, 742 So. 2d 366 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999), Lewis v. State, 740 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999), and Febles v. State, 654 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995), is misplaced where they deal with convictions for burglary with a battery and simple battery or assault, not aggravated battery. Accordingly, the defendant’s convictions and resulting sentences are affirmed. . Williams v. State…
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
- State v. Barton, 523 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 1988)
- Bradley v. State, 540 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
- Morgan v. State, 550 So. 2d 151 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- Cary Brantley v. State, 570 So. 2d 364 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Sampson E. Riley v. State, 543 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
- Kardell Vernon Slater v. State, 543 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
- Smith v. State, 541 So. 2d 1275 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)