Kablitz v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kablitz v. State

138 So. 3d 602, 2014 WL 2197739, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 8070

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 28, 2014

DocketNo. 4D10-226

StatusPublished

This text of 138 So. 3d 602 (Kablitz 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

Kablitz v. State, 138 So. 3d 602, 2014 WL 2197739, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 8070 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

DAMOORGIAN, C.J.

We reconsider on remand our opinion in Kablitz v. State, 134 So.3d- 969 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011), which was quashed by the Florida Supreme Court following its decision in Blackmon v. State, 121 So.3d 535, 548-49 (Fla.2013) (holding that a trial court’s error in failing to instruct the jury pursuant to section 812.025 was “not fundamental error such that we would require a new trial.”). In accordance with the supreme court’s holding in Blackmon, we reverse Kablitz’s conviction for petit theft and remand with directions that the trial court vacate that conviction and resentence him on the dealing in stolen property conviction. We affirm in all other respects.

Remanded for further proceedings.

WARNER and GERBER, JJ., concur.

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

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

DAMOORGIAN, C.J.

We reconsider on remand our opinion in Kablitz v. State, 134 So.3d- 969 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011), which was quashed by the Florida Supreme Court following its decision in Blackmon v. State, 121 So.3d 535, 548-49 (Fla.2013) (holding that a trial court’s error in failing to instruct the jury pursuant to section 812.025 was “not fundamental error such that we would require a new trial.”). In accordance with the supreme court’s holding in Blackmon, we reverse Kablitz’s conviction for petit theft and remand with directions that the trial court vacate that conviction and resentence him on the dealing in stolen property conviction. We affirm in all other respects.

Remanded for further proceedings.

WARNER and GERBER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

138 So. 3d 602, 2014 WL 2197739, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 8070, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kablitz-v-state-fladistctapp-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack