Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Bishop v. State

Bishop v. State

718 So. 2d 890, 1998 WL 598226
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 11, 1998·No. 97-01043·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

718 So.2d 890 (1998)

Samuel Arthur BISHOP, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 97-01043.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

September 11, 1998.

Samuel Arthur Bishop, pro se.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Sonya Roebuck Horbelt, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Samuel Arthur Bishop appeals judgments and sentences for grand theft in the first degree, a first-degree felony, and dealing in stolen property, a second-degree felony. It is undisputed that both offenses arose out of one scheme or course of conduct. We affirm the judgment and sentence for grand theft. Pursuant to section 812.025, Florida Statutes (1995), we strike the judgment and sentence for the less serious offense of dealing in stolen property. See Ridley v. State, 407 So.2d 1000 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981).

THREADGILL, A.C.J., ALTENBERND, J., and DAKAN, STEPHEN L., Associate Judge, concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bishop v. State, 718 So. 2d 890, 1998 WL 598226 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

718 So. 2d 890 (Bishop v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anucinski v. State
90 So. 3d 879 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2012)
Lutz v. State
60 So. 3d 500 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2011)
Anderson v. State
2 So. 3d 303 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2008)
Drew v. State
861 So. 2d 110 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)