Manger v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Manger v. State

758 So. 2d 713, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 3442, 2000 WL 294851

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 22, 2000

DocketNo. 4D99-1839

StatusPublished

This text of 758 So. 2d 713 (Manger 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

Manger v. State, 758 So. 2d 713, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 3442, 2000 WL 294851 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. Appellant has failed to demonstrate fundamental error in his plea of no contest for trafficking in hydrocodone. He misplaces his reliance on Hayes v. State, 750 So.2d 1 (Fla. 1999). Here, the state charged appellant with trafficking in hy-drocodone because he had in his possession hydrocodone in an amount of 28 grams or more, but less than 30 kilograms contrary to sections 893.135(l)(c)l c and 893.03(2)(a)l j, Florida Statutes (1997). According to the arrest affidavit, “[e]ach Hydrocodone pill contained] .7 grams of Hydrocodone, a Schedule II Narcotic, for a total weight of 70 grams of Hydrocodone.” See §§ 893.03(2)(a)l j, 893.03(3)(c)3, Fla. Stat. (1997). Since each pill contained more than 15 milligrams of hydrocodone per dosage unit, the state correctly classified the substance as a Schedule II narcotic, aggregated the total amount in appellant’s possession, and charged him with trafficking in hydrocodone. See id.; Hayes, 750 So.2d at 2.

AFFIRMED.

DELL, POLEN, and GROSS, JJ. concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. Appellant has failed to demonstrate fundamental error in his plea of no contest for trafficking in hydrocodone. He misplaces his reliance on Hayes v. State, 750 So.2d 1 (Fla. 1999). Here, the state charged appellant with trafficking in hy-drocodone because he had in his possession hydrocodone in an amount of 28 grams or more, but less than 30 kilograms contrary to sections 893.135(l)(c)l c and 893.03(2)(a)l j, Florida Statutes (1997). According to the arrest affidavit, “[e]ach Hydrocodone pill contained] .7 grams of Hydrocodone, a Schedule II Narcotic, for a total weight of 70 grams of Hydrocodone.” See §§ 893.03(2)(a)l j, 893.03(3)(c)3, Fla. Stat. (1997). Since each pill contained more than 15 milligrams of hydrocodone per dosage unit, the state correctly classified the substance as a Schedule II narcotic, aggregated the total amount in appellant’s possession, and charged him with trafficking in hydrocodone. See id.; Hayes, 750 So.2d at 2.

AFFIRMED.

DELL, POLEN, and GROSS, JJ. concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

758 So. 2d 713, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 3442, 2000 WL 294851, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/manger-v-state-fladistctapp-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack