COREY ANTHONY JOHNSON, 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.
Corey Anthony Johnson appealed his convictions for multiple offenses, challenging whether separate convictions for resisting an officer with violence and resisting without violence violated double jeopardy principles. The court agreed that convictions for both forms of resisting the same officer during a single continuous criminal episode violate the constitutional protection against double jeopardy.
Separate convictions for resisting an officer with violence and resisting an officer without violence are prohibited when the acts of resisting occurred as part of a single criminal episode. Because Johnson's attempt to flee directly followed his striking the officer, the two charges constituted one criminal episode, and the double jeopardy convictions must be reversed.
[1] Separate convictions for resisting arrest with violence and resisting arrest without violence are prohibited when the acts of resisting occurred as part of a single crimi…
[2] A defendant's continuous resistance to a single ongoing attempt to effectuate his arrest constitutes a single episode of resisting.
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“[C]ourts have uniformly held that separate convictions for resisting arrest with violence and resisting arrest without violence are prohibited when the acts of resisting occurred as part of a single criminal episode.”
Establishes the governing legal rule that double jeopardy prevents multiple convictions for different forms of resisting during a single episode
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMr. Johnson's vehicle was stopped by police for failing to stop at a stop sign. During the traffic stop, Johnson repeatedly punched the officer (resis…
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 Double Jeopardy Principles cases and more on FLexlaw
Corey Anthony Johnson appeals his convictions for driving while license suspended, fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer, depriving an officer of means of protection or communication, resisting an officer with violence, felony battery, criminal mischief, and resisting an officer without violence. He argues on appeal, and the State correctly concedes, that his convictions and sentences for both resisting an officer with violence and resisting an officer without violence violate double jeopardy principles.
Mr. Johnson’s vehicle was stopped by police when he failed to stop at a stop sign. During the traffic stop, Mr. Johnson was accused of resisting the officer with violence for repeatedly punching the officer, and he was also accused of resisting the same officer without violence by thereafter fleeing and ignoring the officer’s commands to stop. “[C]ourts have uniformly held that separate convictions for resisting arrest with violence and resisting arrest without violence are prohibited when the acts of resisting occurred as part of a single criminal episode.” Williams v. State, 959 So.2d 790, 792 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007); see also Ruiz-Alegria v. State, 14 So.3d 1276, 1277 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). In determining whether the charges relating to the acts of resisting are part of one criminal episode, “a defendant’s continuous resistance to a single ongoing attempt to effectuate his arrest constitutes a single episode of resisting.” Williams, 959 So.2d at 793. Furthermore, when a defendant flees from officers and is therefore arrested at a different location from where he was originally detained, it does not transform the single continuous resistance into separate criminal episodes. Id. In the present case, Mr. Johnson’s attempt to flee directly followed his striking the officer, and consequently, the two charges were part of one criminal episode. Therefore, the convictions for both offenses violate the constitutional protection against double jeopardy.
Accordingly, we reverse Mr. Johnson’s conviction for resisting arrest without violence and remand for resentencing. Mr. Johnson’s remaining convictions are affirmed.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; and remanded.
KELLY and BADALAMENTI, JJ„ Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 959 So. 2d 790 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)
- Ruiz-Alegria v. State, 14 So. 3d 1276 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)