ARTHUR COPELAND, 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.
Arthur Copeland appeals his convictions and sentences following a guilty plea to murder in the second degree, robbery, and firearms offenses. The court affirmed most of his sentences but vacated the sentence for possession of a firearm in commission of a felony, remanding for resentencing.
The court affirmed the sentences imposed for murder in the second degree, robbery, and felon in possession of a firearm, holding that dual sentences can be imposed for separate convictions for felony-murder and robbery. However, the court vacated the sentence for possession of a firearm in the commission of a felony and remanded for resentencing.
[1] Separate and cumulative sentences may be imposed for offenses arising out of the same criminal transaction, provided they are not lesser included offenses.
[2] A sentence for possession of a firearm in the commission of a felony may not be imposed in addition to a sentence for the underlying felony.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the trial court erred in imposing four separate and cumulative sentences for offenses arising out of the same criminal transaction”
States the appellant's sole contention on appeal regarding the propriety of multiple sentences
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCopeland was indicted for first-degree murder and charged in three separate informations with using a firearm in committing a felony, robbery, and pos…
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 Cumulative Sentences cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant was indicted for murder in the first degree and charged in three separate informations with the offense of using a firearm in the commission of a felony, robbery and a felon in possession of a firearm. Pursuant to a plea bargain he pled guilty to murder in the second degree and guilty to the other offenses charged by informations. He was sentenced to serve life in the state penitentiary on the murder charge and 15 years imprisonment to run concurrently with the life sentence for possession of a firearm while in the commission of a felony. He received a consecutive sentence of 50 years on the robbery offense, the latter sentence to run concurrently with a 15-year sentence imposed by the court for felonious possession of a firearm. Appellant timely appeals each of the judgments and sentences of the trial court.
Appellant’s sole contention is that the trial court erred in imposing four separate and cumulative sentences for offenses arising out of the same criminal transaction.
Upon review of the record and briefs and applicable case law, the sentences imposed on the offenses of murder in the second degree, robbery and felon in possession of a firearm are affirmed. See the very recent decision of our supreme court in McCloud v. State, Fla.1976, 335 So. 2d 257, wherein the court held that dual sentences can be imposed for separate convictions for felony-murder and robbery. The sentence imposed on the offense of possession of a firearm in the commission of a felony is vacated and set aside. See Cone v. State, Fla.1973, 285 So. 2d 12.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED to the trial court with directions to resentence appellant in accordance with this opinion.
HOBSON, Acting C. J., and BOARD-MAN and SCHEB, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Williams v. State, 337 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)…appellant was convicted, [*1039] assault with intent to commit murder and shooting within an occupied building, necessitated proof of the use of a firearm, which is something more than mere possession. (See also Copeland v. State, Fla.App.2nd 1976, 336 So. 2d 653). AFFIRMED. RAWLS and McCORD, JJ., concur.…
-
White v. State, 346 So. 2d 140 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)…[*141] PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Copeland v. State, 336 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 2 DCA 1976); Yates v. State, 317 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 1 DCA 1975). Gillman v. State, 346 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 1 DCA 1977). RAWLS, Acting C. J., and McCORD and SMITH, JJ., concur.…
-
Marshall v. State, 371 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)…PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED on authority of Copeland v. State, 336 So. 2d 653 (Fla.2d DCA 1976). Cf., Slater v. State, 316 So. 2d 539 (Fla.1975); State v. Ray, 331 So. 2d 316 (Fla.1976), and McCloud v. State, 335 So. 2d 257 (Fla.1976). DOWNEY, ANSTEAD and DAUKSCH, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Cone v. State, 285 So. 2d 12 (Fla. 1973)
- McCLOUD v. State, 335 So. 2d 257 (Fla. 1976)