Robitaille v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Robitaille v. State

266 So. 2d 675, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6334

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 26, 1972

DocketNo. P-137

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 266 So. 2d 675 (Robitaille 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

Robitaille v. State, 266 So. 2d 675, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6334 (Fla. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted on charges of rape, robbery, and a crime against nature pursuant to a jury verdict.

Appellant correctly contends that the sentence imposed upon him in connection with the charges of committing a crime against nature must be vacated and the judgment of conviction thereon reversed on authority of the Florida Supreme Court’s decision in Franklin v. State, 257 So.2d 21. The Attorney General agrees with the appellant that the conviction and sentence on that [676]*676charge must be vacated. Accordingly, as compelled to do by the Supreme Court’s decision in Franklin, we reverse appellant’s conviction on the crime against nature charges and remand that count to the trial court for resentencing under the lesser included offense of committing an unnatural act, as did the court in Franklin.

In all other respects, the judgments appealed herein are affirmed.

SPECTOR, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K., and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted on charges of rape, robbery, and a crime against nature pursuant to a jury verdict.

Appellant correctly contends that the sentence imposed upon him in connection with the charges of committing a crime against nature must be vacated and the judgment of conviction thereon reversed on authority of the Florida Supreme Court’s decision in Franklin v. State, 257 So.2d 21. The Attorney General agrees with the appellant that the conviction and sentence on that [676]*676charge must be vacated. Accordingly, as compelled to do by the Supreme Court’s decision in Franklin, we reverse appellant’s conviction on the crime against nature charges and remand that count to the trial court for resentencing under the lesser included offense of committing an unnatural act, as did the court in Franklin.

In all other respects, the judgments appealed herein are affirmed.

SPECTOR, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K., and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

266 So. 2d 675, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6334, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robitaille-v-state-fladistctapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack