Frederick v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Frederick v. State

639 So. 2d 1047, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 6631, 1994 WL 325327

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 8, 1994

DocketNo. 93-2647

StatusPublished

This text of 639 So. 2d 1047 (Frederick 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

Frederick v. State, 639 So. 2d 1047, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 6631, 1994 WL 325327 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

THOMPSON, Judge.

Dywain A. Frederick appeals two consecutive minimum mandatory three-year sentences imposed after he entered a plea of nolo contendere. Frederick entered pleas to robbery with a firearm¹ and aggravated battery with a firearm.² Both charges arose out of the same incident and involved the same victim. The two crimes 'occurred within three minutes of each other. We affirm the convictions, but we reverse his sentences.

The minimum mandatory sentences were imposed pursuant to section 775.087(2)(a)(1), Florida Statutes (1991). Since these two mandatory sentences arose out of one transaction and involve one victim, the three year mandatory minimum sentences may be imposed concurrently, but not consecutively. Daniels v. State, 595 So.2d 952 (Fla.1992); Langley v. State, 614 So.2d 34 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). Cf. Jacobs v. State, 600 So.2d 1199, 1200 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992) (consecutive minimum mandatory sentences are appropriate where the crime involved two separate victims and two separate and distinct offenses); Kelly v. State, 552 So.2d 206, 208 (Fla. 5th [1048]*1048DCA 1989), review denied, 563 So.2d 632 (Fla.1990) (individual acts separated by time and by physical locations even though the victims were the same was sufficient to impose consecutive minimum mandatory sentences). It was error to sentence Frederick to serve two consecutive minimum mandatory sentences.

Convictions AFFIRMED; Sentences REVERSED and REMANDED for resentenc-ing.

PETERSON and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur.

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

THOMPSON, Judge.

Dywain A. Frederick appeals two consecutive minimum mandatory three-year sentences imposed after he entered a plea of nolo contendere. Frederick entered pleas to robbery with a firearm¹ and aggravated battery with a firearm.² Both charges arose out of the same incident and involved the same victim. The two crimes 'occurred within three minutes of each other. We affirm the convictions, but we reverse his sentences.

The minimum mandatory sentences were imposed pursuant to section 775.087(2)(a)(1), Florida Statutes (1991). Since these two mandatory sentences arose out of one transaction and involve one victim, the three year mandatory minimum sentences may be imposed concurrently, but not consecutively. Daniels v. State, 595 So.2d 952 (Fla.1992); Langley v. State, 614 So.2d 34 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). Cf. Jacobs v. State, 600 So.2d 1199, 1200 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992) (consecutive minimum mandatory sentences are appropriate where the crime involved two separate victims and two separate and distinct offenses); Kelly v. State, 552 So.2d 206, 208 (Fla. 5th [1048]*1048DCA 1989), review denied, 563 So.2d 632 (Fla.1990) (individual acts separated by time and by physical locations even though the victims were the same was sufficient to impose consecutive minimum mandatory sentences). It was error to sentence Frederick to serve two consecutive minimum mandatory sentences.

Convictions AFFIRMED; Sentences REVERSED and REMANDED for resentenc-ing.

PETERSON and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

639 So. 2d 1047, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 6631, 1994 WL 325327, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frederick-v-state-fladistctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack