STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
CLINTON R. WOODS, RESPONDENT
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.
Florida's Supreme Court approved the First District Court of Appeal's decision to vacate two of three convictions for resisting arrest with violence, holding that a defendant may be convicted of only one count of resisting arrest regardless of the number of officers resisted during a single criminal incident.
A defendant may be convicted of only one count of resisting arrest with violence under section 843.01, Florida Statutes, even when the defendant resisted multiple officers during a single criminal incident. The defendant's continuous resistance to the ongoing attempt to effect arrest constitutes a single instance of obstruction.
[1] A defendant fails to preserve an issue for appeal when no objection is made to the testimony at trial.
[2] Multiple convictions and sentences for resisting arrest with violence are improper when the defendant's resistance constitutes a single, continuous act during an ongoing…
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“section 843.01, Florida Statutes (1993), which makes it unlawful for any person to resist with violence any officer in the execution of the officer's legal duty, does not contemplate multiple convictions for each officer resisted during the course of a single criminal incident.”
Establishes the core legal principle that multiple convictions are prohibited even when multiple officers are resisted in one incident.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceClinton R. Woods was convicted of three counts of resisting an officer with violence. The convictions arose from a single criminal incident in which W…
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 Resisting Arrest With Violence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We have for review Woods v. State, 710 So. 2d 1379 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998), which expressly and directly conflicts with the opinions in Coleman v. State, 569 So. 2d 870 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), and Wallace v. State, 689 So. 2d 1159 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), on the issue of whether an individual may be convicted of multiple counts of resisting arrest with violence based on the number of police officers resisted during the course of a single criminal incident. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. We resolved this conflict in Wallace v. State, 724 So. 2d 1176 (Fla.1998), wherein we held that section 843.01, Florida Statutes (1993), which makes it unlawful for any person to resist with violence any officer in the execution of the officer’s legal duty, does not contemplate multiple convictions for each officer resisted during the course of a single criminal incident. See id. at 1181. In this regard, we stated: “While the defendant may have committed more than one offense in his altercation with the officers, including possibly multiple assaults or batteries, or both, on law enforcement officers as were separately charged here, we conclude that his [defendant’s] continuous resistence to the ongoing attempt to effect his arrest constitutes a single instance of obstruction under section 843.01.” Id. In so holding, we quashed the Fourth District’s decision in Wallace and approved the decision in Pierce v. State, 681 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (holding that only one conviction may stand where defendant resisted three officers during course of single episode or incident). 724 So. 2d at 1181.
In this case, the court below vacated two of Woods’ three convictions for resisting an officer with violence based on conduct which occurred during the course of a single criminal incident. See Woods, 710 So. 2d at 1380. In accordance with our decision in Wallace, we approve the decision below.
It is so ordered.
SHAW, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ., concur. HARDING, C.J., dissents with an opinion.
WELLS, J., dissents.
HARDING, C.J.,
dissenting.
I dissent for the reasons expressed in my dissenting opinion in Wallace v. State, 724 So. 2d 1176, 1181 (Fla.1998) (Harding, C.J., dissenting).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Castro v. State, 389 So. 3d 633 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)
- Tammi Jones v. Yellow CAB OF Pensacola Inc., 681 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
- Wallace v. State, 689 So. 2d 1159 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
- Coleman v. State, 569 So. 2d 870 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
- Woods v. State, 710 So. 2d 1379 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)