Dues v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Dues v. State

716 So. 2d 282, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 7878, 1998 WL 347956

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 1, 1998

DocketNo. 97-4320

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 716 So. 2d 282 (Dues 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

Dues v. State, 716 So. 2d 282, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 7878, 1998 WL 347956 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Tommy Dues appeals summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief. For the reasons described below, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.

Dues was tried and convicted of armed robbery and grand theft of an automobile. His motion for post-conviction relief alleged that these two convictions violated double jeopardy. Appellant may be correct if the armed robbery conviction was based solely upon the taking of the automobile. Sirmons v. State, 634 So.2d 153 (Fla.1994). The trial court incorrectly concluded that this claim was barred because it could have been raised on direct appeal. Lippman v. State, 633 So.2d 1061 (Fla.1994). Accordingly, we reverse. and remand to the trial court for further proceedings with regard to this claim.

Appellant’s argument that he was improperly given a habitualized sentence is without merit. This claim was based upon appellant’s mistaken theory that he was or should have been charged with a life felony. However, appellant’s armed robbery conviction was a first-degree felony punishable by life pursuant to section 812.13(2)(a), Florida Statutes. A defendant convicted of a felony in this degree may be habitualized. Burdick v. State, 594 So.2d 267 (Fla.1992). Re-classification of this crime to a life felony pursuant to section 775.087(l)(a) would have been improper. Standley v. State, 554 So.2d 1200 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989).

AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, and REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.

BARFIELD, C.J., and KAHN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Tommy Dues appeals summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief. For the reasons described below, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.

Dues was tried and convicted of armed robbery and grand theft of an automobile. His motion for post-conviction relief alleged that these two convictions violated double jeopardy. Appellant may be correct if the armed robbery conviction was based solely upon the taking of the automobile. Sirmons v. State, 634 So.2d 153 (Fla.1994). The trial court incorrectly concluded that this claim was barred because it could have been raised on direct appeal. Lippman v. State, 633 So.2d 1061 (Fla.1994). Accordingly, we reverse. and remand to the trial court for further proceedings with regard to this claim.

Appellant’s argument that he was improperly given a habitualized sentence is without merit. This claim was based upon appellant’s mistaken theory that he was or should have been charged with a life felony. However, appellant’s armed robbery conviction was a first-degree felony punishable by life pursuant to section 812.13(2)(a), Florida Statutes. A defendant convicted of a felony in this degree may be habitualized. Burdick v. State, 594 So.2d 267 (Fla.1992). Re-classification of this crime to a life felony pursuant to section 775.087(l)(a) would have been improper. Standley v. State, 554 So.2d 1200 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989).

AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, and REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.

BARFIELD, C.J., and KAHN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

716 So. 2d 282, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 7878, 1998 WL 347956, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dues-v-state-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack