Foster v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Foster v. State

157 So. 3d 524, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 2030, 2015 WL 641113

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 16, 2015

DocketNo. 1D13-4703

StatusPublished

This text of 157 So. 3d 524 (Foster 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

Foster v. State, 157 So. 3d 524, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 2030, 2015 WL 641113 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Vincent Christian Foster challenges two of his four convictions in this direct criminal appeal. We find no merit in his first argument and affirm without comment. His second argument — that his convictions for trafficking and possession of methamphetamine violated double jeopardy because they were both based on the possession of the same meth oil — is correct and conceded by the State. We reverse and vacate the lesser offense. See Mullins v. State, 74 So.3d 146, 147 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011); Melton v. State, 73 So.3d 296, 297 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).

Accordingly, we affirm Mr. Foster’s convictions and sentences on Counts I, III, and IV, and reverse and remand with instructions that the trial court vacate his conviction and sentence on Count II.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part.

PADOVANO, MARSTILLER, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Vincent Christian Foster challenges two of his four convictions in this direct criminal appeal. We find no merit in his first argument and affirm without comment. His second argument — that his convictions for trafficking and possession of methamphetamine violated double jeopardy because they were both based on the possession of the same meth oil — is correct and conceded by the State. We reverse and vacate the lesser offense. See Mullins v. State, 74 So.3d 146, 147 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011); Melton v. State, 73 So.3d 296, 297 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).

Accordingly, we affirm Mr. Foster’s convictions and sentences on Counts I, III, and IV, and reverse and remand with instructions that the trial court vacate his conviction and sentence on Count II.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part.

PADOVANO, MARSTILLER, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

157 So. 3d 524, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 2030, 2015 WL 641113, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foster-v-state-fladistctapp-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack