JAMES R. HASH, 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.
The court reversed the summary denial of a Rule 3.850 motion on the ground that counsel was ineffective for failing to object to dual convictions for burglary with assault and home invasion robbery as violating double jeopardy, remanding for the trial court to address the claim on the merits.
Counsel was ineffective for failing to object to convictions for both burglary with assault and home invasion robbery on double jeopardy grounds when both offenses arose from a single criminal episode and uninvited entry.
[1] Burglary of a dwelling with assault or battery is subsumed by home invasion robbery, and convictions of both offenses arising from a single criminal episode and uninvited…
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 convicted of both burglary of a dwelling with assault and home invasion robbery arising from a single criminal episode.…
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 Home Invasion Robbery cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. For the reasons discussed below, we reverse and remand the denial of ground one for further proceed*462ings. We affirm the denial of the appellant’s remaining claims without discussion.
In ground one, the appellant asserts that counsel was ineffective for failing to object to his convictions for both burglary with an assault and home invasion robbery on double jeopardy grounds. This Court has held that “[bjurglary of a dwelling with an assault or battery is subsumed by home-invasion robbery, such that convictions of both offenses arising from a single criminal episode violate the principles of double jeopardy.” Davis v. State, 74 So.3d 1096 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). Thus, if the convictions arose from a single episode and from a single uninvited entry into the victim’s home, the dual convictions are improper. Id. The record before this Court does not include any attachments refuting the appellant’s claim. Thus, we reverse and remand the denial of ground one for the trial court to attach portions of the record refuting appellant’s allegations or to grant relief.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED and REMANDED in part for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
LEWIS, C.J., THOMAS and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.