Frank v. State
682 So. 2d 710, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 12116, 1996 WL 661073
Opinion
Appellant was convicted of two counts of DUI with serious bodily injury. He claims that because only one “driving episode” (appellant’s characterization) caused the two persons to be injured, he can only be convicted of one crime. Appellant concedes his argument is inconsistent with the holding in Melbourne v. State, 655 So.2d 126 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. granted, 662 So.2d 982 (Fla.1995), approved, 679 So.2d 759 (Fla.1996).
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Frank v. State, 682 So. 2d 710, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 12116, 1996 WL 661073 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).
682 So. 2d 710 (Frank v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Melbourne v. State
679 So. 2d 759 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1996)
Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Olah
662 So. 2d 980 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Melbourne v. State
655 So. 2d 126 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)