PEDRO VALDES, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Pedro Valdes appeals his conviction and sentence for grand theft after the trial court resentenced him on that charge following vacation of his original sentence. The court reverses, finding that convictions for both dealing in stolen property and grand theft arising from the same scheme or course of conduct violate double jeopardy.
Convictions for both dealing in stolen property and grand theft violate double jeopardy when they arise in connection with one scheme or course of conduct. Because the record shows both charges relate to a single scheme, the grand theft conviction and sentence must be reversed and vacated.
[1] A conviction for both dealing in stolen property and grand theft violates double jeopardy when the convictions arise from a single scheme or course of conduct.
[2] A confession of error by the State can lead to a reversal of a judgment and sentence.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Convictions for both dealing in stolen property and grand theft violate double jeopardy when the convictions arise 'in connection with one scheme or course of conduct....'”
Establishes the double jeopardy principle that governs simultaneous convictions for these overlapping offenses
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceValdes pleaded guilty in 2003 to burglary, grand theft, and dealing in stolen property, receiving a withhold of adjudication and five years' probation…
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 Scheme Or Course Of Conduct cases and more on FLexlaw
CONFESSION OF ERROR
Pedro Valdes (“Valdes”) appeals the judgment and sentence for count two, grand theft. Based on the State’s proper confession of error, we reverse.
On November 26, 2003, Valdes pled guilty to the following three charges: (1) burglary, (2) grand theft, and (3) dealing in stolen property. Valdes received a withhold of adjudication and five years’ probation. On March 9, 2007, Valdes’s probation was revoked and he was sentenced to fifteen years on the burglary charge, five years on the grand theft charge, and fifteen years on the dealing in stolen property charge for a total of thirty-five years.1 The sentences ran consecutively. On October 21, 2009, this Court affirmed the trial court’s order of the revocation of probation, but remanded for the trial court to correct the written order of revocation “to reflect the sole reason for which the court orally revoked [Valdes’s] probation.” Valdes v. State, 20 So.3d 987, 988 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009).
On June 29, 2010, Valdes, pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), filed a Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence, arguing that he could not be sentenced on both dealing in stolen property and grand theft. On October 20, 2010, the State filed its response to the *1164motion, and citing to Hall v. State, 826 So.2d 268 (Fla.2002), conceded that Valdes’s adjudication and sentence on the grand theft charge should be vacated, and that the record should be corrected to reflect that Valdes shall serve only two consecutive fifteen-year terms of confinement. On December 21, 2010, the trial court vacated the judgment and sentence as to grand theft.
On January 21, 2011, the trial court adjudicated Valdes guilty of grand theft, and resentenced Valdes to “sentence suspended,” on that charge. Neither Valdes nor his attorney were present. Valdes appeals.
Based on this Court’s decision in Cono v. State, 916 So.2d 44 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005), Valdes’s conviction and sentence for grand theft must be reversed. “Convictions for both dealing in stolen property and grand theft violate double jeopardy when the convictions arise ‘in connection with one scheme or course of conduct....’ § 812.025, Fla. Stat. (2005).” Id. at 46; see also Hall, 826 So.2d at 271. As the record reflects that both charges for dealing in stolen property and grand theft relate to one scheme or course of conduct, we reverse the judgment and sentence for grand theft. On remand, the trial court shall enter an order vacating Valdes’s conviction and sentence for grand theft.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Blackmon v. State, 121 So. 3d 535 (Fla. 2013)…gnized conflict with Kiss. Id. at 361, 365.15 Third District When confronted with theft and dealing in stolen property convictions contrary to section 812.025, the Third District Court of Appeal reverses the lesser conviction. See Valdes v. State, 93 So. 3d 1163, 1164 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) (“As the record reflects that both charges for dealing in stolen property and grand theft relate to one scheme or course of conduct, we reverse the judgment and sentence for grand theft.”); Corvo v. State, 916 So. 2d 44 (Fla…
Authorities Cited
- Hall v. State, 826 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 2002)
- Williams v. State, 916 So. 2d 44 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)
- United Auto. Ins. Co. v. Ricardo, 916 So. 2d 44 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
- Terra-Adi Int'l Bayshore, LLC v. Kostandinos Georgarious, 20 So. 3d 987 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)
- Valdes v. State, 20 So. 3d 987 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)