Carter v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Carter v. State

503 So. 2d 969, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 745, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 12043

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 11, 1987

DocketNo. 4-86-1168

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 503 So. 2d 969 (Carter 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

Carter v. State, 503 So. 2d 969, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 745, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 12043 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse and remand with directions that appellant’s judgment be vacated and that judgment be entered for the lesser offense of second degree robbery. Although there was evidence that appellant threatened to use an unseen firearm during the course of the robbery, the proof at trial established that he did not possess a firearm during the course of the robbery. Hence, a conviction for robbery with a firearm cannot be sustained. See I.O. v. State, 412 So.2d 42 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). We reject appellant’s claim that his counsel could not stipulate to the facts in the manner approved by the trial court here. See A.E.K. v. State, 432 So.2d 720 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).

DOWNEY, ANSTEAD and DELL, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse and remand with directions that appellant’s judgment be vacated and that judgment be entered for the lesser offense of second degree robbery. Although there was evidence that appellant threatened to use an unseen firearm during the course of the robbery, the proof at trial established that he did not possess a firearm during the course of the robbery. Hence, a conviction for robbery with a firearm cannot be sustained. See I.O. v. State, 412 So.2d 42 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). We reject appellant’s claim that his counsel could not stipulate to the facts in the manner approved by the trial court here. See A.E.K. v. State, 432 So.2d 720 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).

DOWNEY, ANSTEAD and DELL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

503 So. 2d 969, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 745, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 12043, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carter-v-state-fladistctapp-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack