Cannady v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Cannady v. State

557 So. 2d 225, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1220, 1990 WL 17473

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 27, 1990

DocketNo. 87-2679

StatusPublished

This text of 557 So. 2d 225 (Cannady 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

Cannady v. State, 557 So. 2d 225, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1220, 1990 WL 17473 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

On a theory that the defendant’s six criminal episodes over a seventy-day period constituted a “one-man crime wave” in violation of Florida’s criminal RICO statute, section 895.03, Florida Statutes (1985), the State consolidated all eighteen felony counts for a single trial. This appeal is taken from convictions and 1,698 years in sentences entered on all eighteen counts. We reverse.

At the conclusion of all the evidence, the court entered a judgment of acquittal on the RICO count finding, obviously, that there was no evidence of an essential criminal enterprise. See Boyd v. State (Fla. 3d DCA Case No. 88-1093) opinion filed Feb. 20, 1990) [15 F.L.W. 489]; State v. Nishi, 521 So.2d 252 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 531 So.2d 1355 (Fla.1988). The cases were nevertheless submitted to the jury, in consolidated form, on grounds that they constituted connected acts or transactions. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.151(a).

In State v. Williams, 453 So.2d 824 (Fla.1984), the controlling authority, the supreme court, noting that its ruling is settled law in this state, held that where convictions were obtained on nine consolidated informations involving acts or transactions occurring over eight different days, and where the offenses were connected only by the fact that they were allegedly committed by the same defendant and were similar in nature, reversal was mandated. This case is indistinguishable.

Reversed and remanded for separate trials.

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

PER CURIAM.

On a theory that the defendant’s six criminal episodes over a seventy-day period constituted a “one-man crime wave” in violation of Florida’s criminal RICO statute, section 895.03, Florida Statutes (1985), the State consolidated all eighteen felony counts for a single trial. This appeal is taken from convictions and 1,698 years in sentences entered on all eighteen counts. We reverse.

At the conclusion of all the evidence, the court entered a judgment of acquittal on the RICO count finding, obviously, that there was no evidence of an essential criminal enterprise. See Boyd v. State (Fla. 3d DCA Case No. 88-1093) opinion filed Feb. 20, 1990) [15 F.L.W. 489]; State v. Nishi, 521 So.2d 252 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 531 So.2d 1355 (Fla.1988). The cases were nevertheless submitted to the jury, in consolidated form, on grounds that they constituted connected acts or transactions. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.151(a).

In State v. Williams, 453 So.2d 824 (Fla.1984), the controlling authority, the supreme court, noting that its ruling is settled law in this state, held that where convictions were obtained on nine consolidated informations involving acts or transactions occurring over eight different days, and where the offenses were connected only by the fact that they were allegedly committed by the same defendant and were similar in nature, reversal was mandated. This case is indistinguishable.

Reversed and remanded for separate trials.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

557 So. 2d 225, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1220, 1990 WL 17473, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cannady-v-state-fladistctapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack