KENNETH R. JACKSON, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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.
Florida Supreme Court denied certiorari petition because the District Court of Appeal's decision was consistent with the Court's recent holding in State v. Stewart that a felony marijuana sale information need not allege prior drug convictions, consideration, or minimum quantity.
A felony information charging marijuana sale need not allege prior drug convictions, delivery for consideration, or that the amount exceeded five grams.
[1] A felony information charging sale of marijuana need not allege that the defendant was previously convicted of a drug abuse violation, that delivery was for consideration…
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 intelligenceJackson petitioned for certiorari to review a District Court of Appeal decision that he claimed conflicted with Patterson v. State and State v. Stewar…
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 Marijuana cases and more on FLexlaw
ALDERMAN, Judge.
This cause is before us on petition for writ of certiorari to review the decision of the District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, in Jackson v. State, 365 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978), which purportedly conflicts with Patterson v. State, 313 So. 2d 712 (Fla.1975), and State v. Stewart, 358 So. 2d 583 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978).
Since the filing of this petition for writ of certiorari, we have rendered a decision in State v. Stewart, 374 So. 2d 1381 (Fla.1979), quashing the district court’s decision and holding that to charge a felony an information, alleging a sale of marijuana, need not also allege, that the defendant has been previously convicted of a violation of the drug abuse law, or that delivery was for consideration, or that the amount of marijuana exceeded five grams. We also limited Patterson v. State to its peculiar facts and overruled it to the extent that it was inconsistent with our holding in Stewart. The decision of the district court presently before us is consistent with our holding in Stewart.
Accordingly, conflict having been dispelled by our decision in Stewart, the petition for writ of certiorari is denied.
It is so ordered.
ENGLAND, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, OVERTON and SUNDBERG, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cantrell v. State, 405 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)…tly or consecutively. This statute has been interpreted as prohibiting sentencing on lesser included offenses arising out of the same criminal transaction as the higher offense. Sellars v. State, 362 So. 2d 33 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), cert. discharged, 377 So. 2d 24 (Fla.1979); McClendon v. State, 372 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Purvis v. State, 370 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). Although Section 775.021(4) might appear to authorize separate sentences herein, we conclude that double jeopardy principles prec…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Stewart, 374 So. 2d 1381 (Fla. 1979)
- Patterson v. State, 313 So. 2d 712 (Fla. 1975)
- State v. Stewart, 358 So. 2d 583 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)
- Jackson v. State, 365 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)