RICHARD A. STOVALL, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 the sentence for possession of a narcotic drug was improper and should be stricken, but affirmed the conviction and amended sentence.
Appellant was convicted of sale and possession of a narcotic drug, and unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense. The trial…
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 Unlawful Possession Of A Firearm While Engaged In A Criminal Offense cases and more on FLexlaw
In this appeal, the appellant presents three points. The first point urges error in sentencing because the trial court sentenced the appellant for both the sale and possession of a narcotic drug when the crime arose out of the same transaction. See Yost v. State, Fla.App.1971, 243 So.2d 469. In the present instance, appellant was sentenced to three years upon each of the named crimes, the sentences to run concurrently. Under these circumstances, it is not necessary to remand the cause to the trial court. See Johnson v. State, Fla.App.1972, 260 So.2d 212; Martin v. State, Fla.App.1971, 251 So.2d 283. We correct the improper sen*867tence by striking therefrom the three year concurrent sentence upon the conviction for possession of a narcotic drug.
Appellant’s second point urges that the court, sitting without a jury, erred in finding the appellant guilty because the de-fence of entrapment was proved and not refuted as a matter of law. We find this point does not present reversible error for the reasons set out in Langford v. State, 111 Fla. 506, 149 So. 570 (1933); Brosi v. State, Fla.App.1972, 263 So.2d 849.
Appellant’s third point challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support appellant’s conviction upon a charge of the unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense. See Fla. Stat. § 790.07, F.S.A. A review of the record shows that appellant’s contention is without merit. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed and the sentence is amended by striking therefrom the three year concurrent sentence upon the charge of possession of a narcotic drug and as amended the sentence is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Bower, 575 F.2d 499 (5th Cir. 1978)…[§ 790.07]: Antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, nonsupport of dependents, bigamy, or other similar offenses. Fla.Stat. § 790.07(3). “Other similar offenses” does not include narcotics violations. See Stovall v. State, 272 So. 2d 866 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1973). Florida courts have not adjudicated whether carriage of a concealed firearm during the commission of a felony within one’s own dwelling house is exempted by any Florida law. It would appear that § 790.25(3)(n), which excepts…
Authorities Cited
- Yost v. State, 243 So. 2d 469 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)
- Langford v. State, 111 Fla. 506 (Fla. 1933)
- Martin v. State, 251 So. 2d 283 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)
- Sinclair Johnson v. State, 260 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972)
- Brosi v. State, 263 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)