GREGORY LAMAR BOLDS, 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 convicting and sentencing a defendant twice for the same offense violates double jeopardy protections.
Appellant was charged with three robberies, but two counts in the information were identical, charging the robbery of the same victim. The trial court…
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 Lesser Included Offense cases and more on FLexlaw
CAMPBELL, Acting Chief Judge.
Appellant challenges his judgment and sentence for two counts of theft and one count of robbery. He was originally charged with three counts of robbery, but on two of the counts was found guilty of the lesser offense of theft. On appeal, he argues that one of his convictions and sentences for theft should be reversed. We agree.
The record indicates that appellant was originally accused of the robbery of three separate victims. However, when the information was filed, Counts II and III contained identical language charging appellant with the robbery of only one victim, Jose Velasquez. Since there is nothing to distinguish the two counts, and the information was never amended either orally or in writing, appellant has essentially been convicted and sentenced twice for the same offense in violation of his right against double jeopardy. See Miles v. State, 418 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982).
We therefore affirm appellant’s conviction and sentence as to Count II. In regard to Count III, we reverse his conviction and vacate his sentence. The robbery conviction in Count IV is affirmed.
THREADGILL and GREEN, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bolds v. State, 749 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…nd III of the information contain identical language. Since the information was never amended, either orally or in writing, appellant has been improperly subjected to double jeopardy in being twice convicted for the same offense. See Bolds v. State, 723 So. 2d 900 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). Appellant also argues that his conviction and sentence on Count II should be reversed because his conviction was based on the improper introduction of collateral crimes evidence regarding appellant’s participation in another cr…
Authorities Cited
- Miles v. State, 418 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)