Calle v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Calle v. State

493 So. 2d 1121, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1981, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9703

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 16, 1986

DocketNo. 84-1484

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 493 So. 2d 1121 (Calle 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

Calle v. State, 493 So. 2d 1121, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1981, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9703 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant’s conviction and sentence for trafficking in cocaine and conspiracy to traffic in cocaine is reversed in part upon a finding that the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal on the conspiracy to traffic count as the evidence presented did not establish that the defendant committed the crime of conspiracy. See Ashenoff v. State, 391 So.2d 289 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Defendant’s remaining contentions that the trial court erred in denying his motion for severance and further erred in denying his motion for mistrial are' without merit. See Downer v. State, 375 So.2d 840 (Fla.1979); McDermott v. State, 383 So.2d 712 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Consequently, defendant’s conviction and sentence for trafficking in cocaine is affirmed and his conviction and sentence for conspiracy to traffic in cocaine is reversed and the cause is remanded for re-sentencing.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM.

Defendant’s conviction and sentence for trafficking in cocaine and conspiracy to traffic in cocaine is reversed in part upon a finding that the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal on the conspiracy to traffic count as the evidence presented did not establish that the defendant committed the crime of conspiracy. See Ashenoff v. State, 391 So.2d 289 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Defendant’s remaining contentions that the trial court erred in denying his motion for severance and further erred in denying his motion for mistrial are' without merit. See Downer v. State, 375 So.2d 840 (Fla.1979); McDermott v. State, 383 So.2d 712 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Consequently, defendant’s conviction and sentence for trafficking in cocaine is affirmed and his conviction and sentence for conspiracy to traffic in cocaine is reversed and the cause is remanded for re-sentencing.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

493 So. 2d 1121, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1981, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9703, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/calle-v-state-fladistctapp-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack