PATRICK A. SANTERAMO
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Double jeopardy prohibits conviction of both organized scheme to defraud and grand theft based on the same conduct; deferred adjudication does not cure this violation and the grand theft counts must be dismissed.
[1] Deferred adjudication of conviction does not cure a double jeopardy violation created by conviction of both organized scheme to defraud and grand theft based on the same…
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 intelligence“the defendant will be placed in double jeopardy if convicted of both organized scheme to defraud and grand theft based on the same conduct”
The State concedes the double jeopardy issue and cites Pizzo v. State, 945 So. 2d 1203, 1207 (Fla. 2006).
Santeramo was tried and convicted by jury of money laundering, three campaign contribution violations, two counts of organized scheme to defraud, and …
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 Organized Scheme To Defraud cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendant was tried by a jury and found guilty of money laundering, three counts of violating campaign contribution laws, two counts of organized scheme to defraud, and two counts of grand theft. The State concedes that the defendant will be placed in double jeopardy if convicted of both organized scheme to defraud and grand theft based on the same conduct. See, e.g., Pizzo v. State, 945 So. 2d 1203, 1207 (Fla. 2006). While the trial court recognized the double jeopardy issue, it failed to dismiss the grand theft counts. Instead, adjudication and sentencing were “deferred” as to those counts.
We affirm the defendant’s convictions and sentences for money laundering, violating campaign contribution laws, and organized scheme to defraud. We reverse the deferrals of adjudication and remand for dismissal of the grand theft counts.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded.
GERBER, C.J., GROSS and CONNER, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.