Coleman v. State

713 So. 2d 987, 1998 WL 309077
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedJune 12, 1998
Docket92134
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 713 So. 2d 987 (Coleman v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Coleman v. State, 713 So. 2d 987, 1998 WL 309077 (Fla. 1998).

Opinion

713 So.2d 987 (1998)

Alvin COLEMAN, Petitioner,
v.
STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 92134.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June 12, 1998.

*988 James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Kenneth Witts, Assistant Public Defender, Seventh Judicial Circuit, Daytona Beach, for Petitioner.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Robin A. Compton, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

We have for review the decision in Coleman v. State, 702 So.2d 307 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), which certified conflict with the opinion in Galloway v. State, 680 So.2d 616 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), concerning the issue of whether additional sentencing points for carrying or possessing a firearm during the commission of a crime may be added to a defendant's sentencing score where the defendant is convicted of carrying a concealed weapon or possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

Recently, we resolved this conflict in White v. State, 714 So.2d 440 (Fla.1998), wherein we held that it is error for a trial court to assess additional sentencing points for possessing a firearm where the sole underlying crime is carrying a concealed firearm or possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. In other words, rule 3.702(d)(12) of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure and section 921.0014, Florida Statutes (1993), do not contemplate the addition of sentencing points for carrying or possessing a firearm where the carrying or possession of a firearm is the essential element of the underlying offense. In so holding, we approved the Fourth District's decision in Galloway.

Therefore, in accordance with our decision in White, we quash the decision below.

It is so ordered.

KOGAN, C.J., OVERTON, SHAW, HARDING and ANSTEAD, JJ., and GRIMES, Senior Justice, concur.

WELLS, J., dissents.

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

Related

Cochran v. Chapman
21 So. 3d 1244 (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama, 2008)
Odom v. State
719 So. 2d 351 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Cleveland v. State
717 So. 2d 188 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
State v. Redding
712 So. 2d 1257 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
713 So. 2d 987, 1998 WL 309077, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coleman-v-state-fla-1998.