Jammie Simmons v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Jammie Simmons v. State

220 So. 3d 474, 2017 WL 946408, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 3199

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 10, 2017

DocketCase 5D15-4529

StatusPublished

This text of 220 So. 3d 474 (Jammie Simmons 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

Jammie Simmons v. State, 220 So. 3d 474, 2017 WL 946408, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 3199 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Jammie Simmons timely appeals his convictions and sentences for aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer with a firearm, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, possession of cocaine, and two separate counts of resisting arrest. Simmons raises three issues on appeal, *475 arguing that the trial court erred in: 1) denying his motion to withdraw plea; 2) denying his motion for appointment of counsel; and 3) imposing two consecutive mandatory minimum sentences. We affirm on the first two issues without further discussion.

As to the sentencing issue, the State properly concedes error. See Williams v. State, 186 So.3d 989, 993 (Fla. 2016) (holding that consecutive sentences of mandatory minimum terms for multiple firearm offenses are impermissible if the offenses arose from the same criminal episode and the firearm was not discharged). In the instant case, the trial court imposed consecutive mandatory minimum sentences for the aggravated assault and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon charges. The State concedes that these two charges stemmed from the same criminal episode. Accordingly, we reverse and remand with instructions to impose the mandatory minimum sentences concurrently rather than consecutively.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED.

SAWAYA and TORPY, JJ„ and JACOBUS, B.W., Senior Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Jammie Simmons timely appeals his convictions and sentences for aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer with a firearm, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, possession of cocaine, and two separate counts of resisting arrest. Simmons raises three issues on appeal, *475 arguing that the trial court erred in: 1) denying his motion to withdraw plea; 2) denying his motion for appointment of counsel; and 3) imposing two consecutive mandatory minimum sentences. We affirm on the first two issues without further discussion.

As to the sentencing issue, the State properly concedes error. See Williams v. State, 186 So.3d 989, 993 (Fla. 2016) (holding that consecutive sentences of mandatory minimum terms for multiple firearm offenses are impermissible if the offenses arose from the same criminal episode and the firearm was not discharged). In the instant case, the trial court imposed consecutive mandatory minimum sentences for the aggravated assault and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon charges. The State concedes that these two charges stemmed from the same criminal episode. Accordingly, we reverse and remand with instructions to impose the mandatory minimum sentences concurrently rather than consecutively.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED.

SAWAYA and TORPY, JJ„ and JACOBUS, B.W., Senior Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

220 So. 3d 474, 2017 WL 946408, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 3199, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jammie-simmons-v-state-fladistctapp-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack