MARTIN
v.
STATE
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.
Convictions for domestic battery by strangulation and simple battery do not violate double jeopardy when the defendant committed two separate, distinct acts at different times and locations.
[1] A double jeopardy violation does not occur when a defendant commits separate and distinct acts of strangulation at different times and locations, even if the acts are par…
[2] Separate convictions for domestic battery by strangulation and simple battery are permissible when the evidence demonstrates two distinct acts of strangulation.
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“If successive impulses are separately given, even though all unite in swelling a common stream of action, separate indictments lie... The test is whether the individual acts are prohibited, or the course of action which they constitute. If the former, then each act is punishable separately.”
Court citation to Blockburger v. U.S. standard for determining when separate convictions violate double jeopardy
Gregory Martin was convicted of domestic battery by strangulation and two counts of simple battery. Martin committed two separate acts of strangulatio…
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 Multiple Convictions cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed April 24, 2019. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D17-1848 Lower Tribunal No. 09-41439
________________
Gregory Martin,
Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Richard L. Hersch, Judge.
Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Natasha Baker-Bradley, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Natalia Costea, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before LOGUE, SCALES, and LINDSEY, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Gregory Martin appeals his convictions for domestic battery by strangulation and two counts of simple battery. Martin claims these convictions violate double jeopardy because he was “convicted twice—for domestic battery by strangulation and simple battery—for a single act of strangulation.”
Martin’s argument is without merit. The record plainly reveals that Martin committed two separate, distinct acts of strangulation at two different times and in two different locations. No double jeopardy violation occurred. See Graham v.
State, 207 So. 3d 135, 137–39 (Fla. 2016) (citation omitted) (quoting Blockburger v. U.S., 284 U.S. 299, 302 (1932) (“If successive impulses are separately given,
even though all unite in swelling a common stream of action, separate indictments lie’ . . . ‘The test is whether the individual acts are prohibited, or the course of action which they constitute. If the former, then each act is punishable separately.”); see also Schwartzberg v. State, 215 So. 3d 611, 616 (Fla. 4th DCA
2017) (concluding double jeopardy was not violated because “even though both of appellant’s battery convictions occurred within the same criminal episode and were part of a ‘common stream of action,’ . . . ‘each act is punishable separately’ because the ‘individual acts’ of battery are distinct and prohibited.”).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (U.S. 1932)
- Graham v. State, 207 So. 3d 135 (Fla. 2016)
- Schwartzberg v. State, 215 So. 3d 611 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)