Randazzo v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Randazzo v. State

597 So. 2d 965, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 5180, 1992 WL 91416

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 6, 1992

DocketNo. 90-1539

StatusPublished

This text of 597 So. 2d 965 (Randazzo 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

Randazzo v. State, 597 So. 2d 965, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 5180, 1992 WL 91416 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. As to the issue regarding double jeopardy, the factual predicate for the prior convictions for dealing in stolen property and grand theft involved different conduct at different times than the armed robbery and first degree murder conviction which are the subject of this appeal. See United States v. Felix, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 1377, 118 L.Ed.2d 25 (1992); McKinney v. State, 579 So.2d 80 (Fla.1991). Re-[966]*966gar ding appellant’s claim of lack of notice of the state’s intent to proceed on a felony murder theory where the indictment charged premeditated murder, see Young v. State, 579 So.2d 721 (Fla.1991), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 1198, 117 L.Ed.2d 438 (1992). As to the contention that the court erred in submitting a general verdict, see Haliburton v. State, 561 So.2d 248, 250 (Fla.1990), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 2910, 115 L.Ed.2d 1073 (1991). Finally, we find that any error in the introduction of hearsay testimony was harmless. State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986).

STONE, WARNER and POLEN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. As to the issue regarding double jeopardy, the factual predicate for the prior convictions for dealing in stolen property and grand theft involved different conduct at different times than the armed robbery and first degree murder conviction which are the subject of this appeal. See United States v. Felix, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 1377, 118 L.Ed.2d 25 (1992); McKinney v. State, 579 So.2d 80 (Fla.1991). Re-[966]*966gar ding appellant’s claim of lack of notice of the state’s intent to proceed on a felony murder theory where the indictment charged premeditated murder, see Young v. State, 579 So.2d 721 (Fla.1991), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 1198, 117 L.Ed.2d 438 (1992). As to the contention that the court erred in submitting a general verdict, see Haliburton v. State, 561 So.2d 248, 250 (Fla.1990), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 2910, 115 L.Ed.2d 1073 (1991). Finally, we find that any error in the introduction of hearsay testimony was harmless. State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986).

STONE, WARNER and POLEN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

597 So. 2d 965, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 5180, 1992 WL 91416, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/randazzo-v-state-fladistctapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack