Gonzalez v. State

268 So. 2d 552
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 14, 1972·No. No. 72-415·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have considered the various points raised by appellant, but find no merit therein. The evidence amply supports the entry of the judgments of conviction, and appellant has failed to adequately preserve his attack upon the counts relating to his sale and possession of cocaine, a narcotic drug, on August 13, 1971.

We remand with directions to vacate the sentence imposed pursuant to convictions under the counts charging unlawful possession of cocaine, since these sentences are contrary to the rule enunciated in Yost v. State, Fla.App. 1971, 243 So.2d 469 and Easton v. State, Fla.App. 1971, 250 So.2d 294. In all other respects, the judgments and sentences are affirmed.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part with directions.

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

Gonzalez v. State, 268 So. 2d 552 (Fla. Ct. App. 1972).

268 So. 2d 552 (Gonzalez v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wright v. State
348 So. 2d 633 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1977)
Mendez v. State
280 So. 2d 525 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1973)