Coleman v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Coleman v. State

559 So. 2d 103, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 2096, 1990 WL 35352

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 28, 1990

DocketNo. 88-01999

StatusPublished

This text of 559 So. 2d 103 (Coleman 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

Coleman v. State, 559 So. 2d 103, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 2096, 1990 WL 35352 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

THREADGILL, Judge.

William Coleman was charged on April 6, 1988, with possession and delivery of cocaine. He was convicted by a jury and appeals the judgments and sentences on double jeopardy grounds. Both convictions arose out of a single sale of one rock of cocaine to a Tampa police detective and therefore sentencing him on both charges violates his constitutional protection against double jeopardy. State v. Burton, 555 So.2d 1210 (Fla.1989). Although the appellant did not make this objection at the sentencing, violation of double jeopardy protection is fundamental error requiring no objection for review. Marion v. State, 526 So.2d 1077 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988).

We vacate the judgment and sentence for possession of cocaine. We affirm the conviction and sentence for delivery of cocaine. Because the sentences imposed were within the recommended guideline range without considering the possession conviction, resentencing is not necessary. Lewis v. State, 545 So.2d 427 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989).

Affirmed in part, vacated in part.

RYDER, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.

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

THREADGILL, Judge.

William Coleman was charged on April 6, 1988, with possession and delivery of cocaine. He was convicted by a jury and appeals the judgments and sentences on double jeopardy grounds. Both convictions arose out of a single sale of one rock of cocaine to a Tampa police detective and therefore sentencing him on both charges violates his constitutional protection against double jeopardy. State v. Burton, 555 So.2d 1210 (Fla.1989). Although the appellant did not make this objection at the sentencing, violation of double jeopardy protection is fundamental error requiring no objection for review. Marion v. State, 526 So.2d 1077 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988).

We vacate the judgment and sentence for possession of cocaine. We affirm the conviction and sentence for delivery of cocaine. Because the sentences imposed were within the recommended guideline range without considering the possession conviction, resentencing is not necessary. Lewis v. State, 545 So.2d 427 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989).

Affirmed in part, vacated in part.

RYDER, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

559 So. 2d 103, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 2096, 1990 WL 35352, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coleman-v-state-fladistctapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack