Hightower v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hightower v. State

301 So. 2d 504

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 2, 1974·No. No. 73-819·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The evidence was legally sufficient to uphold appellant’s convictions for the offenses of breaking and entering with intent to commit grand larceny and grand larceny. Since both these offenses arose out of the same transaction, the single two-year sentence he received shall be considered to relate to the more serious offense of breaking and entering, and the trial court records should be amended accordingly. Edmond v. State, Fla.App.2d, 1973, 280 So.2d 449.

Affirmed.

McNULTY, C. J., and BOARDMAN and GRIMES, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The evidence was legally sufficient to uphold appellant’s convictions for the offenses of breaking and entering with intent to commit grand larceny and grand larceny. Since both these offenses arose out of the same transaction, the single two-year sentence he received shall be considered to relate to the more serious offense of breaking and entering, and the trial court records should be amended accordingly. Edmond v. State, Fla.App.2d, 1973, 280 So.2d 449.

Affirmed.

McNULTY, C. J., and BOARDMAN and GRIMES, JJ., concur.

Hightower v. State, 301 So. 2d 504 (Fla. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

301 So. 2d 504 (Hightower v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related