JAMES SHAW, 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 separate sentences for possession and sale of heroin arising from the same transaction is improper, and only one sentence, on the highest offense, should be imposed.
[1] A trial court does not err by refusing to instruct a jury on entrapment when no evidence supports such a defense.
[2] Separate sentences cannot be imposed for two offenses that are facets of a single criminal 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 intelligenceAppellant was convicted of possession and sale of heroin, both arising from the same criminal transaction. The trial court imposed separate sentences …
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 Sale Of Heroin cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant was convicted after a jury trial on charges of possession and sale of heroin. Both charges arose out of the same criminal transaction.
The first contention made by appellant is that the trial judge committed reversible error by refusing to instruct the jury on the* issue of entrapment as requested by defense counsel. No error has been shown in this regard. See Blackshear v. State, 246 So.2d 173 (Fla.App.1971).
There is merit to appellant’s second point which contends that the trial court erred in imposing separate sentences for possession and sale of heroin when the record reflects that both offenses were a facet of the same transaction. According to the informations filed, both offenses occurred on March 25, 1971, at 10:50 P.M. at Leonard’s Pool Hall, Fairfax Drive in Pensacola, Florida.
In Martin v. State, 251 So.2d 283 (Fla.App.1971), citing from Wells v. State, 168 So.2d 787 (Fla.App.1964), the court stated the controlling rule to be as follows:
“ . . . 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. [Citations omitted.] In such a case, only one sentence should be imposed and that sentence should be on the highest offense charged. . . . ”
In Martin, supra, we held that the sale of heroin is a more serious or higher offense than possession thereof and therefore set aside the sentences there being considered which had been imposed for possession of heroin, and at the same time we affirmed the sentences imposed for the sale of that narcotic. Following the precedent of the Martin case, we are therefore required to set aside the sentence imposed in the case at bar against appellant for possession of heroin under count one in the amount of five years. The sentence imposed for the offense of sale of heroin under count two in the amount of ten years is affirmed.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
SPECTOR, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K., and WIGGINTON, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Robinson v. State, 325 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)…f the same transaction only one sentence should be imposed, and that sentence should be for the highest offense charged. Yost v. State, 243 So. 2d 469 (Fla.App. 3rd 1971); Torres v. State, 262 So. 2d 458 (Fla.App. 3rd 1972). See also, Shaw v. State, 264 So. 2d 95 (Fla.App.lst 1972); Brown v. State, 264 So. 2d 28 (Fla.App. 1st 1972) and Johnson v. State, 260 So. 2d 212 (Fla.App. 1st 1972). Affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded' for further action consistent with this opinion. MILLS, Acting C. J…
-
Temperance Wright v. State, 348 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)…So. 2d 30 (Fla.4th DCA 1972); Gonzalez v. State, 268 So. 2d 552 (Fla.3d DCA 1972); Jones v. State, 265 So. 2d 514 (Fla.4th DCA 1972); Carr v. State, 264 So. 2d 871 (Fla.1st DCA 1972); Hunt v. State, 264 So. 2d 855 (Fla.lst DCA 1972); Shaw v. State, 264 So. 2d 95 (Fla.lst DCA 1972). Affirmed as to the judgments of conviction; affirmed as to sentence and fine on the sale of cocaine count; reversed as to the sentence on the possession of cocaine count.…
-
Singleton v. State, 386 So. 2d 1314 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)…da Statutes (1977). . Section 893.13(l)(a)(l), Florida Statutes (1977). . Section 893.13(l)(e), Florida Statutes (1977). . Williams v. State, 110 So. 2d 654 (Fla. 1959). . See Wright v. State, 348 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977) and Shaw v. State, 264 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972). . Section 775.084, Florida Statutes (1977). . See Eutsey v. State, 383 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 1980) and Bell v. State, 382 So. 2d 107 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). . See Grubbs v. State, 373 So. 2d 905 (Fla. 1979) and Wood v. State, 378 So.…
Authorities Cited
- Martin v. State, 251 So. 2d 283 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)
- Wells v. State, 168 So. 2d 787 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- Blackshear v. State, 246 So. 2d 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)