Gracey v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Gracey v. State

23 So. 3d 855, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 21110, 2009 WL 4800160

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 15, 2009

Docket1D08-5609

StatusPublished

This text of 23 So. 3d 855 (Gracey 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

Gracey v. State, 23 So. 3d 855, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 21110, 2009 WL 4800160 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Darrow Gracey, entered an open plea to the court on all charges in case numbers 06-515, 06-597, and 07-088. In case number 06-515, Appellant was convicted of possession of more than twenty grams of marijuana with the intent to sell on count one and possession of more than twenty grams of marijuana on count two. Appellant argues, and we agree, that these convictions violate double jeopardy because they are based on the same quantum of marijuana. Keene v. State, 600 So.2d 513 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Although the arrest report references a second baggie of marijuana, there was no indication in the record that the second baggie contained more than twenty grams of marijuana; thus, the second baggie could not provide the factual basis for the charge of possession of more than twenty grams of marijuana. Accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions to vacate Appellant’s conviction and sentence for possession of more than twenty grams of marijuana in case number 06-515. We affirm all of Appellant’s remaining convictions.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

HAWKES, C.J., WOLF and DAVIS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Darrow Gracey, entered an open plea to the court on all charges in case numbers 06-515, 06-597, and 07-088. In case number 06-515, Appellant was convicted of possession of more than twenty grams of marijuana with the intent to sell on count one and possession of more than twenty grams of marijuana on count two. Appellant argues, and we agree, that these convictions violate double jeopardy because they are based on the same quantum of marijuana. Keene v. State, 600 So.2d 513 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Although the arrest report references a second baggie of marijuana, there was no indication in the record that the second baggie contained more than twenty grams of marijuana; thus, the second baggie could not provide the factual basis for the charge of possession of more than twenty grams of marijuana. Accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions to vacate Appellant’s conviction and sentence for possession of more than twenty grams of marijuana in case number 06-515. We affirm all of Appellant’s remaining convictions.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

HAWKES, C.J., WOLF and DAVIS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 So. 3d 855, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 21110, 2009 WL 4800160, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gracey-v-state-fladistctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack