HENRY TURNER, 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.
Turner was convicted of both possession of cocaine and possession of cocaine in a detention facility. The appellate court held that these convictions violated double jeopardy principles because they arose from the same cocaine and the jail possession charge merely added a single jurisdictional element without requiring proof of any fact distinct from simple possession.
The court held that Turner should not have been convicted and sentenced for both crimes because they involved the same cocaine and the detention facility offense does not require proof of any element distinct from simple possession. The court also held that limiting closing argument to thirty minutes was not an abuse of discretion under the circumstances presented.
[1] Double jeopardy principles bar conviction and sentencing for multiple offenses arising from the same criminal transaction when one offense's statutory elements are subsum…
[2] Possession of a controlled substance and possession of the same controlled substance as contraband within a detention facility are not separate offenses for double jeopar…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“For the purposes of this subsection, offenses are separate if each offense requires proof of an element that the other does not, without regard to the accusatory pleading or the proof adduced at trial.”
Establishes the Blockburger test standard for determining whether multiple convictions in one prosecution constitute double jeopardy violations.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTurner was arrested and searched at a Marion County Jail facility, where cocaine was discovered in his sole possession. He was charged with and convic…
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 Double Jeopardy Principles cases and more on FLexlaw
W. SHARP, Judge.
Turner appeals from his judgment and sentences received after he was found guilty of possession of cocaine,1 and possession of contraband in a county detention center or introduction of contraband into a county detention center.2 He argues he was denied a fair trial because the trial court limited defense counsel’s closing argument to thirty minutes. He also argues his convictions for both crimes in this case violated double jeopardy principles. We disagree with the first argument, given the circumstances of this case. However, we agree Turner should not have been convicted and sentenced for both crimes, since they involved the same cocaine being found in his sole possession when he was delivered to a Marion County Jail facility following his arrest.
Section 775.021(4), Florida Statutes (1993) provides:
(a) Whoever, in the course of one criminal transaction or episode, commits an act or acts which constitute one or more separate criminal offenses, ... shall be sentenced separately for each criminal offense; .... For the purposes of this subsection, offenses are separate if each offense requires proof of an element that the other does not, without regard to the accusatory pleading or the proof adduced at trial. (b) ... Exceptions to this rule of construction are:
3. Offenses which are lesser offenses the statutory elements of which are subsumed by the greater offense.
In essence, Florida has adopted the Blockburger 3 test to determine whether it is proper to try to convict a defendant for multiple crimes in the context of one prosecution. This statute borrows double jeopardy concepts and principles and applies them, whether or not the double jeopardy provisions of the State of Florida and the United States Constitutions are applicable. At this point, it is not clear to us that the United States Supreme Court or the Florida Supreme Court has applied the constitutional double jeopardy provisions in the context of a single criminal prosecution.4
Rozier v. State, 620 So. 2d 194 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 629 So. 2d 135 (Fla.1993), is indistinguishable from this case. In that ease, Rozier was convicted of both possession of cocaine5 and possession of the same cocaine in a county jail. As in this case, the cocaine was discovered when Rozier was searched at the jail, after being arrested. The court noted that the possession charge arose solely in the context of the county jail search. The only distinction between the two offenses charged was the additional element of proof for section 951.22 that the offense occurred in a county detention facility. The court stated that the simple possession charge includes no element distinct from the charge of possession of contraband in the jail facility. The court concluded that double jeopardy principles barred Rozier’s conviction for both crimes. See also Shivers v. State, 593 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992).
Accordingly, we reverse Turner’s conviction for possession of cocaine pursuant to section 893.13(6)(a) and vacate the sentence imposed for that crime. We affirm Turner’s conviction and sentence for possession or introduction of cocaine in a detention facility pursuant to section 951.22.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part.
THOMPSON, J., concurs.
GRIFFIN, J., dissents with opinion.
. §§ 893.13(6)(a), 893.03(2)(a)4, Fla.Stat. (1993).
. § 951.22(1), Fla.Stat. (1993) provides: "It is unlawful ... to introduce into or possess upon the grounds of any county detention facility ... controlled substances as defined in s. 893.02(4)....”.
. Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932).
. Missouri v. Hunter, 459 U.S. 359, 103 S.Ct. 673, 74 L.Ed.2d 535 (1983); Carawan v. State, 515 So. 2d 161 (Fla.1987).
. The statute involved in Rozier was section 893.13(l)(f), Florida Statutes (1989), which provided:
It is unlawful for any person to be in actual or constructive possession of a controlled substance unless such controlled substance was lawfully obtained from a practitioner or pursuant to a valid prescription or order of a practitioner. ...
GRIFFIN, Judge,
dissenting.
The jury found the defendant guilty of two separate offenses: possession of cocaine and introduction of contraband into a county detention facility. I think these are two separate offenses separately punishable under Florida law. § 775.021(4), Florida Statutes (1993).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Green v. State, 828 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…d 322 (1989); Missouri v. Hunter, 459 U.S. 359, 103 S.Ct. 673, 74 L.Ed.2d 535 (1983); Crawford v. State, 662 So. 2d 1016, 1017 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995), receded from on other grounds, State v. Reardon, 763 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Turner v. State, 661 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Wilkins v. State, 543 So. 2d 800, 802 (Fla. 5th DCA) (Sharp, W., J., concurring), rev. denied, 554 So. 2d 1170 (Fla.1989); Gordon v. State, 457 So. 2d 1095, 1098 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), approved, 478 So. 2d 1063 (Fla.1985). Our Le…
-
Desire v. State, 829 So. 2d 948 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…he court must determine “whether each [*950] offense has an element that the other does not.” Gordon v. State, 780 So. 2d 17, 20 (Fla.2001). See also Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932). In Turner v. State, 661 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995), the court held that a defendant should not have been convicted and sentenced for both possession of cocaine and possession of contraband or introduction of contraband into a county detention center since both charges involved th…
-
Johnson v. State, 873 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…e necessary elements of the offense.”). Johnson also argues, and the State concedes, that double jeopardy was violated by his two convictions for possessing the same cocaine. See Desire v. State, 829 So. 2d 948 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Turner v. State, 661 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Rozier v. State, 620 So. 2d 194 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). Because the convictions for [*480] possession of contraband in a county detention facility and possession of cocaine were based on the same cocaine residue that was found in t…
Previewing 3 of 4 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)
- Missouri v. Hunter, 459 U.S. 359 (U.S. 1983)
- Dion Michael Carawan v. State, 515 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1987)
- Rozier v. State, 620 So. 2d 194 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)
- Rondell L. Shivers v. State, 593 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)