DiGrazia v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

DiGrazia v. State

551 So. 2d 591, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2558, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6114, 1989 WL 130677

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 3, 1989

DocketNo. 88-00349

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 551 So. 2d 591 (DiGrazia 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

DiGrazia v. State, 551 So. 2d 591, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2558, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6114, 1989 WL 130677 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

ALTENBERND, Judge.

Mr. DiGrazia appeals his convictions for both sale and possession of cocaine. We affirm his convictions for sale of cocaine and also affirm certain conditions of probation challenged on appeal. We reverse his conviction for possession of cocaine.

The complaint affidavit filed in this case describes a single substance of cocaine for both charges. Mr. DiGrazia initially entered a plea agreement to plead guilty to both counts. Thereafter, the supreme court decided Carawan v. State, 515 So.2d 161 (Fla.1987). At the sentencing hearing, defense counsel represented that only one quantity of drug was involved in the transaction and moved the trial court to dismiss one of the charges. The state did not attempt to prove that two quantities of cocaine were involved. Consequently, we must reverse his conviction for possession [592]*592and remand this case for resentencing. Gordon v. State, 528 So.2d 910 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988), approved sub nom. State v. Smith, 547 So.2d 613 (Fla.1989).

Affirmed in part, reversed and remanded in part.

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and THREADGILL, J., concur.

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

ALTENBERND, Judge.

Mr. DiGrazia appeals his convictions for both sale and possession of cocaine. We affirm his convictions for sale of cocaine and also affirm certain conditions of probation challenged on appeal. We reverse his conviction for possession of cocaine.

The complaint affidavit filed in this case describes a single substance of cocaine for both charges. Mr. DiGrazia initially entered a plea agreement to plead guilty to both counts. Thereafter, the supreme court decided Carawan v. State, 515 So.2d 161 (Fla.1987). At the sentencing hearing, defense counsel represented that only one quantity of drug was involved in the transaction and moved the trial court to dismiss one of the charges. The state did not attempt to prove that two quantities of cocaine were involved. Consequently, we must reverse his conviction for possession [592]*592and remand this case for resentencing. Gordon v. State, 528 So.2d 910 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988), approved sub nom. State v. Smith, 547 So.2d 613 (Fla.1989).

Affirmed in part, reversed and remanded in part.

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and THREADGILL, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

551 So. 2d 591, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2558, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6114, 1989 WL 130677, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/digrazia-v-state-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack