Campana v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Campana v. State

765 So. 2d 58, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 1047, 2000 WL 140441

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 9, 2000

DocketNo. 4D99-0793

StatusPublished

This text of 765 So. 2d 58 (Campana 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

Campana v. State, 765 So. 2d 58, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 1047, 2000 WL 140441 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

GROSS, J.

We affirm appellant’s conviction of trafficking in cocaine. See § 893.135(l)(b)l.c., Fla. Stat. (1997). The trial court correctly denied appellant’s request to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of attempted trafficking in cocaine, since the only evidence in the case proved a “completed offense.” Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.510(a); see Ostrum v. State, 638 So.2d 594 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Henry v. State, 445 So.2d 707 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Lunsford v. State, 426 So.2d 1178 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).

Appellant showed the undercover officer two bundles of money and made a number of incriminating statements, including “if my people like [the first kilo], then I can do five or six kilos [of cocaine] a week.” Carrying a duffel bag to transport the cocaine, appellant went to the officer’s undercover vehicle, a Ford Explorer. The officer told appellant that the kilos were on the floorboard of the driver’s side of the vehicle. Appellant got into the Explorer and took possession of the cocaine. Holding the cocaine between his legs, appellant asked the officer for a knife so that he could test the drug. The officer said that the kilo already had a “window,” but the defendant did not find this acceptable. Not having a knife, the officer gave appellant his keys; appellant sliced open the bag of cocaine, looked at it, felt it, and put some on his tongue. Shortly thereafter, the takedown team arrived and appellant was arrested.

On the remaining issue, the trial court gave appellant an adequate opportunity to question the translator.

AFFIRMED.

WARNER, C.J., and POLEN, J., concur.

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

GROSS, J.

We affirm appellant’s conviction of trafficking in cocaine. See § 893.135(l)(b)l.c., Fla. Stat. (1997). The trial court correctly denied appellant’s request to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of attempted trafficking in cocaine, since the only evidence in the case proved a “completed offense.” Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.510(a); see Ostrum v. State, 638 So.2d 594 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Henry v. State, 445 So.2d 707 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Lunsford v. State, 426 So.2d 1178 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).

Appellant showed the undercover officer two bundles of money and made a number of incriminating statements, including “if my people like [the first kilo], then I can do five or six kilos [of cocaine] a week.” Carrying a duffel bag to transport the cocaine, appellant went to the officer’s undercover vehicle, a Ford Explorer. The officer told appellant that the kilos were on the floorboard of the driver’s side of the vehicle. Appellant got into the Explorer and took possession of the cocaine. Holding the cocaine between his legs, appellant asked the officer for a knife so that he could test the drug. The officer said that the kilo already had a “window,” but the defendant did not find this acceptable. Not having a knife, the officer gave appellant his keys; appellant sliced open the bag of cocaine, looked at it, felt it, and put some on his tongue. Shortly thereafter, the takedown team arrived and appellant was arrested.

On the remaining issue, the trial court gave appellant an adequate opportunity to question the translator.

AFFIRMED.

WARNER, C.J., and POLEN, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

765 So. 2d 58, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 1047, 2000 WL 140441, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/campana-v-state-fladistctapp-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack