JEROME SCHNEIDER, 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.
Appellant's conviction for sale of methaqualone was reversed as duplicative of his conviction for delivery of barbiturates, since methaqualone is a barbiturate and delivery includes sale under Florida law.
A conviction for sale of methaqualone cannot stand as a separate offense when the defendant is also convicted of delivery of barbiturates, because methaqualone is a barbiturate and delivery includes sale.
[1] A conviction for sale of a controlled substance cannot stand as a separate offense when the defendant is also convicted of delivery of the same substance, where the subst…
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 intelligenceAppellant was arrested on June 30, 1973, and charged with delivery of barbiturates and sale of methaqualone (a hypnotic drug).…
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 Controlled Substance cases and more on FLexlaw
HOBSON, Judge.
Appellant was convicted and sentenced to five years in prison for the crime of delivery of barbiturates, and to three years for sale of a hypnotic drug, to wit: methaqualone, in violation of § 404.02 F.S., said sentences to run consecutively.
Section 404.02 F.S. (1972), which was in effect at the time of appallant’s arrest on June 30, 1973, prohibited the unlawful delivery of any barbiturate or central nervous system stimulant, hallucinogenic drug or other controlled drugs. “Delivery” was defined in § 404.01(4) as including both selling and giving away. Methaqualone was encompassed in the definition of barbiturates which was defined in § 404.01(1) as including hypnotic and somnifacient drugs. [See § 893.03, Schedule III, effective July 1, 1973.] The charge of “delivery” of “barbiturates” included the charge of “sale” of “methaqualone,” and therefore the two counts did not charge separate and distinct offenses, but the same offense. Accordingly, the judgment and sentence for the sale of methaqualone were improperly entered and are hereby reversed. The valid judgment and sentence for delivery of barbiturates are affirmed.
The other points raised on appeal by appellant have been considered and found to be without merit.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part.
McNULTY, C. j., and SCHEB, J., concur.