MICHAEL PATRICK MURPHY, 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.
The court held that the appellant's convictions for aggravated fleeing and reckless driving did not violate double jeopardy principles.
Appellant led law enforcement on a high-speed chase through three counties, committing distinct acts of reckless driving in each. The pursuit lasted a…
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 Reckless Driving cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant challenges his convictions of aggravated fleeing or attempting to elude a láw enforcement officer and reckless driving on double jeopardy grounds. We affirm.
A Madison County police officer attempted to stop appellant, who was driving a motorcycle, and appellant fled. A high-speed chase through Madison County followed. Appellant fled into Suwannee County. Two deputy sheriffs, in an authorized law enforcement vehicle with agency insignia and jurisdictional markings, and with sirens and lights activated, joined the chase and also attempted to apprehend appellant. Appellant drove on the dividing center line between two rows of traffic, forcing other drivers to swerve to avoid being hit. He drove at speeds of 110— 115 miles per hour in a 55 miles per hour speed zone. The chase continued into Hamilton County, where a deputy sheriff observed appellant traveling approximately 125 miles per hour. That deputy sheriff also attempted to apprehend appellant. Appellant drove in the wrong lane of traffic and an oncoming vehicle was forced to swerve to avoid a head-on collision. Appellant finally stopped when he had an accident in Hamilton County. The pursuit through all three counties lasted approximately 30 minutes. Apparently, appellant never stopped his vehicle nor was the pursuit interrupted in any other way.
Murphy failed to heed law enforcement officers from three different counties. He committed distinct acts of reckless driving in each county. Appellant’s acts constituted separate offenses and there was no double jeopardy violation. See Brown v. State, 430 So. 2d 446, 447 (Fla.1983); State v. Mitchell, 719 So. 2d 1245, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D2348 (Fla. 1st DCA1998).
AFFIRMED.
MINER and LAWRENCE, JJ., and McDonald, PARKER LEE, Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cruz v. State, 956 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…e legislature clearly intended that the commission of multiple acts of fleeing or attempting to elude a law enforcement officer be prosecuted as discrete offenses notwithstanding that all occurred during a single episode.”4 See also Murphy v. State, 723 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). In the instant case, the state presented eyewitness testimony from three separate officers in three separate cars, from whom Cruz had fled. Some officers witnessed his high speed fleeing, while another observed his reckless dis…
-
State v. Morse, 77 So. 3d 748 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011)…s already convicted of this same offense in Seminole County related to the chase that occurred in both counties. We accept this concession, although we question whether double jeopardy principles require dismissal of the charge. Cf. Murphy v. State, 723 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). . The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution provides that no person shall be "subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.'' U.S. Const. Amend. V. Likewise, Article I, section 9, of the…
Authorities Cited
- Brown v. State, 430 So. 2d 446 (Fla. 1983)
- State v. General Lee Mitchell, 719 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)