Bolds v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bolds v. State

749 So. 2d 580, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 463, 2000 WL 61644

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 26, 2000

DocketNo. 2D97-4909

StatusPublished

This text of 749 So. 2d 580 (Bolds v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bolds v. State, 749 So. 2d 580, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 463, 2000 WL 61644 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

CAMPBELL, Acting Chief Judge.

Appellant challenges his judgment and sentence for two counts of armed robbery. [581]*581The State concedes that appellant’s conviction and sentence on Count III must be reversed because Counts II and III of the information contain identical language. Since the information was never amended, either orally or in writing, appellant has been improperly subjected to double jeopardy in being twice convicted for the same offense. See Bolds v. State, 723 So.2d 900 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).

Appellant also argues that his conviction and sentence on Count II should be reversed because his conviction was based on the improper introduction of collateral crimes evidence regarding appellant’s participation in another crime. A review of the record reveals that appellant never objected to this testimony at trial. Therefore, any error is waived.

Accordingly, appellant’s conviction and sentence as to Count II is affirmed; his conviction as to Count III is reversed and his sentence vacated. The case is remanded for resentencing in the event that the vacation of appellant’s conviction and sentence as to Count III affects the permissible sentence on his remaining conviction.

Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded.

ALTENBERND and FULMER, JJ„ Concur.

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