MACK SEARS, 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.
Separate convictions for different offenses involving multiple victims during the same episode do not violate double jeopardy principles.
The defendant was convicted of aggravated battery for shooting a child in an apartment and attempted manslaughter for shooting at another victim outsi…
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 Attempted Manslaughter cases and more on FLexlaw
SILBERMAN, Judge.
Mack Sears was charged with aggravated battery involving the use of a deadly weapon, shooting into a dwelling, and attempted first degree murder involving a firearm. He was convicted as charged on the aggravated battery and the shooting into a dwelling. He was also convicted of attempted manslaughter with the use of a firearm, a lesser included offense to the attempted murder charge. Sears argues that the convictions for aggravated battery and attempted manslaughter violate his double jeopardy rights. We disagree and affirm.
After an altercation with Robin Williams in front of her apartment building, Sears fired a rifle at her. As Williams retreated to her apartment, Sears continued to shoot. He fired three shots, one of which struck and injured a seven year old child who was in the apartment.
In his argument, Sears argues various factors relating to the double jeopardy issue and concludes that the convic tions for the aggravated battery of the child and the attempted manslaughter of Williams violate double jeopardy principles. We cannot agree because separate convictions for different offenses involving multiple victims who are killed or injured during the same episode do not violate double jeopardy. Onesky v. State, 544 So. 2d 1048, 1049 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); see also State v. Reddick, 568 So. 2d 902, 903 (Fla.1990) (separate convictions for homicide and shooting into an occupied dwelling were proper when the defendant fired at least four shots into a house occupied by six persons, killing one occupant and wounding another). Sears was properly convicted of both attempted manslaughter and aggravated battery because the one episode involved multiple victims of different crimes arising from three separate shots.
Affirmed.
THREADGILL, A.C.J., and SALCINES, J., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Austin v. State, 203 So. 3d 1017 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016)…is reasoning is insufficient to conclusively refute Austin’s claim. Generally, “separate convictions for different offenses involving multiple victims who are killed or injured during the same episode do not violate double jeopardy.” Sears v. State, 790 So. 2d 1154, 1155 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). However, the record shows that [*1018] Austin’s two armed robbery convictions stemmed from a single criminal transaction in which there was a single taking from a single register, involving multiple uses of force against tw…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Reddick, 568 So. 2d 902 (Fla. 1990)
- Onesky v. State, 544 So. 2d 1048 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)