Dees v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Dees v. State

54 So. 3d 644, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 2680, 2011 WL 715009

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 2, 2011

DocketNo. 1D09-5638

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 54 So. 3d 644 (Dees 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

Dees v. State, 54 So. 3d 644, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 2680, 2011 WL 715009 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was convicted of driving while license revoked as a habitual traffic offender, in violation of section 322.34(5), Florida Statutes (2009) (Count I); driving while license suspended, revoked or canceled with knowledge, in violation of section 322.34(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2009) (Count II); and driving without a valid license, in violation of section 322.03(1), Florida Statutes (2009) (Count III). All three counts arose out of the same offense. We affirm the appellant’s conviction on Count I without discussion. We reverse the appellant’s conviction on Count II because Counts I and II are mutually exclusive. See Franklin v. State, 816 So.2d 1203 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). We also reverse the appellant’s conviction on Count III. Dual convictions on Counts I and III violate double jeopardy because Count III is a necessarily lesser-included offense of Count I. See § 775.021(4)(b)3., Fla. Stat. (2009); Fla. Std. Jury Instr. (Crim.) 28.11(a).

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED with instructions to vacate the appellant’s convictions on Counts II and III and resentence him on Count I.

WOLF, WEBSTER, and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was convicted of driving while license revoked as a habitual traffic offender, in violation of section 322.34(5), Florida Statutes (2009) (Count I); driving while license suspended, revoked or canceled with knowledge, in violation of section 322.34(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2009) (Count II); and driving without a valid license, in violation of section 322.03(1), Florida Statutes (2009) (Count III). All three counts arose out of the same offense. We affirm the appellant’s conviction on Count I without discussion. We reverse the appellant’s conviction on Count II because Counts I and II are mutually exclusive. See Franklin v. State, 816 So.2d 1203 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). We also reverse the appellant’s conviction on Count III. Dual convictions on Counts I and III violate double jeopardy because Count III is a necessarily lesser-included offense of Count I. See § 775.021(4)(b)3., Fla. Stat. (2009); Fla. Std. Jury Instr. (Crim.) 28.11(a).

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED with instructions to vacate the appellant’s convictions on Counts II and III and resentence him on Count I.

WOLF, WEBSTER, and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 So. 3d 644, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 2680, 2011 WL 715009, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dees-v-state-fladistctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack