BENJAMIN MARTIN, 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 held that imposing sentences for both possession and sale of drugs arising from the same transaction is improper, and only one sentence should be imposed on the highest offense.
[1] A jury may be permitted to take the charging information into the jury room during deliberations.
[2] It is improper to impose separate sentences for two offenses that constitute facets of a single transaction.
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 intelligenceDefendant was convicted of possession and sale of heroin on two separate dates, and sale of cocaine on another date. He was sentenced to 5 years concu…
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 Single Transaction Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
Defendant appeals judgments of conviction and sentences of the following crimes, viz.: Possession of heroin on May 13, 1970; Sale of heroin on May 13, 1970; Sale of cocaine on May 14, 1970; Possession of heroin on May 15, 1970; and Sale of heroin on May 15, 1970. Sentences of 5 years for each conviction were imposed by the trial judge to be served concurrently.
Two points are asserted by defendant on appeal. First, he contends that the court committed reversible error in allowing the jury, over his objection, to take the information into the jury room. Such contention is without merit. Roberts v. State, 188 So.2d 392 (Fla.App.3d, 1966).
Defendant’s second point pertains to the sentences upon each count of the information. The convictions of possession and sale of heroin on the 13th day of May, 1970, were upon a facet or phase of the same transaction. The same is true of the convictions of possession and sale of heroin on the 15th day of May, 1970. As stated in Wells v. State, 168 So.2d 787 (Fla.App.3d, 1964):
“ * * * It is established law in Florida that where convictions are entered on two offenses, each of which constitutes a facet of a single transaction, it is improper to impose sentence on each. Williams v. State, Fla.1953, 69 So.2d 766; Tribue v. State, Fla.App.1958, 106 So.2d 630; Sharon v. State, Fla.App., 156 So.2d 677, supra. In such a case, only one sentence should be imposed and that sentence should be on the highest offense charged. * * * ”
Also see Yost v. State, 243 So.2d 469 (Fla.App.3d, 1971). We consider the sale of the contraband to be the more serious, or highest, offense, therefore, the sentences imposed for possession of heroin on the 13th day of May, 1970, and possession of heroin on the 15th day of May, 1970, *284are set aside. The sentences imposed for sale of heroin on the 13th day of May, 1970, the sale of cocaine on the 14th day of May, 1970, and the sale of heroin on the 15th day of May, 1970, are affirmed.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and RAWLS and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (13 total)
-
Ellis Edmond v. State, 280 So. 2d 449 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973)…ate, Fla.1953, 69 So. 2d 766; Young v. State, Fla.1953, 69 So. 2d 761; Mixon v. State, Fla.1951, 54 So. 2d 190; Washington v. State, 1906, 51 Fla. 137, 40 So.765; Sparks v. State, Fla.App.4th 1972, 256 So. 2d 537; Martin v. State, Fla.App. 1st 1971, 251 So. 2d 283; Keenan v. State, Fla.App.2d 1971, 253 So. 2d 273; Weeks v. State, Fla.App.3d 1971, 253 So. 2d 459; Yost v. State, Fla.App.3d 1971, 243 So. 2d 469; Easton v. State, Fla.App.2d 1971, 250 So. 2d 294; Wyche v. State, Fla.App.2d 1965, 178 So. 2d 875; Sh…
-
Wheeler v. State, 549 So. 2d 687 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)…. At common law the “single transaction rule” prohibited multiple convictions for offenses arising out of a single transaction where each offense was a facet of the transaction. Simmons v. State, 151 Fla. 778, 10 So. 2d 436 (1942); Martin v. State, 251 So. 2d 283 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971); Yost v. State, 243 So. 2d 469 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971). In 1974, the Florida Legislature created section 775.021, Florida Statutes, which provided the rules of construction for the new criminal code. Section 775.021(4), enacted in 197…
-
Caivano v. State, 276 So. 2d 245 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973)…no was therefore charged and convicted of two facets or phases of the same transaction. Only one sentence should have been imposed, and that for the highest offense charged. Yost v. State, Fla.App.1971, 243 So. 2d 469; Martin v. State, Fla.App.1971, 251 So. 2d 283; Brown v. State, Fla.App.1972, 264 So. 2d 28; Jones v. State, Fla.App.1972, 265 So. 2d 514. We have examined the other points raised on appeal and find them to be without merit. [*246] The judgment is affirmed, but the sentences are vacated and the…
Previewing 3 of 13 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Yost v. State, 243 So. 2d 469 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)
- Sharon v. State, 156 So. 2d 677 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)
- Williams v. State, 69 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 1953)
- Macon Tribue v. State, 106 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)
- Wells v. State, 168 So. 2d 787 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- Roberts v. State, 188 So. 2d 392 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)