DANIEL AARON NICHOLSON, 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.
Appellant's trafficking conviction reversed and possession convictions affirmed based on controlling precedent from codefendant's appeal; sentences vacated and remanded for resentencing.
The appellant's conviction for trafficking in hydrocodone is reversed while convictions for possession of cocaine and drug paraphernalia are affirmed, with sentences vacated for resentencing.
[1] When a codefendant's appeal establishes controlling precedent on sufficiency of evidence and jury instruction issues, the same result applies to a jointly tried appellant…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant was tried jointly with a codefendant on charges of trafficking in hydrocodone, possession of cocaine, and possession of drug paraphernal…
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 Trafficking In Hydrocodone cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant challenges criminal convictions which were obtained in a joint trial with a codefendant. In this appeal, the appellant contends that there was insufficient evidence to support the convictions for trafficking in hydrocodone, and for possession of cocaine and drug paraphernalia. The appellant also contends that the use of a jury instruction with an “and/or” conjunction between his name and the code-fendant’s name was fundamental error. These same issues were addressed by this court in the codefendant’s separate appeal in Nicholson v. State, 38 So.3d 107 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010), where the codefendant’s trafficking conviction was reversed, and his possession of cocaine and paraphernalia convictions were affirmed. Nicholson is controlling authority as to these matters, and the appellant’s conviction for trafficking is likewise reversed, while his convictions for possession of cocaine and paraphernalia are affirmed. In light of the reversal of the trafficking conviction, the appellant’s sentences are vacated and the case is remanded for resentencing under a corrected scoresheet. See Vroom v. State, 48 So.3d 82 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); Smith v. State, 687 So.2d 308 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997).
ROBERTS, CLARK, and WETHERELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Vroom v. State, 48 So. 3d 82 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
- Smith v. State, 687 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)