JOHNNY HOLMES, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
JOHNNY HOLMES, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
923 So. 2d 557
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2006)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
BROWNING, J.
Appellant’s convictions for both grand theft and grand theft of a motor vehicle violate double jeopardy principles because the items forming the basis for the grand theft charge were not stolen in a distinct criminal act, but simply happened to be inside the car when it was stolen. See Mixson v. State, 857 So. 2d 362 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). Accordingly, we affirm the conviction and sentence as to Count I, grand theft of a motor vehicle, reverse the conviction as to Count II, grand theft, and direct the lower tribunal to vacate the conviction and sentence as to Count II.
ALLEN and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Johnson v. State, 228 So. 3d 1164 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)…courts have continuously held that dual convictions for grand theft auto and theft of property within the vehicle at the time of the taking violate double jeopardy principles. See Senelus v. State, 994 So. 2d 493 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); Holmes v. State, 923 So. 2d 557 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); Ford v. State, 849 So. 2d 477 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Mixson v. State, 857 So. 2d 362 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003); Beaudry v. State, 809 So. 2d 83 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); Sirmons v. State, 634 So. 2d 153 (Fla. 1994). When the subject re-poss…
Authorities Cited
- Mixson v. State, 857 So. 2d 362 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)