Huffman v. State

642 So. 2d 40, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 8219, 1994 WL 442828
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 17, 1994·No. No. 92-03681·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this appeal, appellant challenges his convictions for both dealing in stolen property and grand theft. Appellee, state of Florida, concedes that appellant cannot be convicted and sentenced for grand theft and dealing in stolen property where the same stolen property involved in the same scheme or course of conduct is the subject of both counts. We reverse the conviction and sentence for grand theft since that is the least serious offense, and affirm the conviction and sentence for dealing in stolen property. Appellant was sentenced as a habitual violent felony offender. Our reversal of his grand theft conviction and sentence has no effect on the remainder of his sentences.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and THREADGILL and LAZZARA, JJ., concur.

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

Huffman v. State, 642 So. 2d 40, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 8219, 1994 WL 442828 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

642 So. 2d 40 (Huffman v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Michielli
937 P.2d 587 (Washington Supreme Court, 1997)
State v. Michielli
916 P.2d 458 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1996)
Castle v. State
654 So. 2d 1277 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)