Cohen v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Cohen v. State

688 So. 2d 994, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 1806, 1997 WL 82572

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 28, 1997

DocketNo. 96-663

StatusPublished

This text of 688 So. 2d 994 (Cohen 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

Cohen v. State, 688 So. 2d 994, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 1806, 1997 WL 82572 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks review of his sentence after this court reversed a departure sentence of life imprisonment and remanded for re-sentencing within the guidelines. Cohen v. State, 656 So.2d 525 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995), review denied, 666 So.2d 901 (Fla.1996).¹ We find no error in the imposition of a minimum mandatory sentence for armed burglary based on the verdict finding him guilty of that offense “as charged in the information.” State v. Tripp, 642 So.2d 728 (Fla.1994), is distinguishable from the facts presented here. The stacking of minimum mandatory sentences was error, however. Because the two robberies and the aggravated assault were all committed during a single criminal episode, it was error to have these minimum mandatory sentences run consecutively. Jackson v. State, 659 So.2d 1060 (Fla.1995); State v. Boatwright, 559 So.2d 210 (Fla.1990); LeCroy v. State, 533 So.2d 750 (Fla.1988), cert, denied, 492 U.S. 925, 109 S.Ct. 3262, 106 L.Ed.2d 607 (1989); State v. Thomas, 487 So.2d 1043 (Fla.1986); Palmer v. State, 438 So.2d 1 (Fla.1983). There was no adequate temporal or spacial distinction between the offenses that would permit the imposition of consecutive minimum mandatory sentences based on use of a firearm. Accordingly, we amend the judgment and sentences to reflect that the minimum mandatory sentences be served concurrently.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; SENTENCES AMENDED.

PETERSON, C. J., and GOSHORN and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks review of his sentence after this court reversed a departure sentence of life imprisonment and remanded for re-sentencing within the guidelines. Cohen v. State, 656 So.2d 525 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995), review denied, 666 So.2d 901 (Fla.1996).¹ We find no error in the imposition of a minimum mandatory sentence for armed burglary based on the verdict finding him guilty of that offense “as charged in the information.” State v. Tripp, 642 So.2d 728 (Fla.1994), is distinguishable from the facts presented here. The stacking of minimum mandatory sentences was error, however. Because the two robberies and the aggravated assault were all committed during a single criminal episode, it was error to have these minimum mandatory sentences run consecutively. Jackson v. State, 659 So.2d 1060 (Fla.1995); State v. Boatwright, 559 So.2d 210 (Fla.1990); LeCroy v. State, 533 So.2d 750 (Fla.1988), cert, denied, 492 U.S. 925, 109 S.Ct. 3262, 106 L.Ed.2d 607 (1989); State v. Thomas, 487 So.2d 1043 (Fla.1986); Palmer v. State, 438 So.2d 1 (Fla.1983). There was no adequate temporal or spacial distinction between the offenses that would permit the imposition of consecutive minimum mandatory sentences based on use of a firearm. Accordingly, we amend the judgment and sentences to reflect that the minimum mandatory sentences be served concurrently.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; SENTENCES AMENDED.

PETERSON, C. J., and GOSHORN and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

688 So. 2d 994, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 1806, 1997 WL 82572, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cohen-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack