Roy v. State

693 So. 2d 63, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3239, 1997 WL 163033
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 9, 1997·No. No. 96-1723·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal, although appellant raises a number of issues, we conclude that only one merits discussion. Appellant challenges his convictions for both carjacking with a firearm and use of a firearm during the commission of a felony as a violation of double jeopardy because both were predicated upon the same episode. We agree. Accordingly, we reverse appellant’s conviction for use of a firearm during the commission of a felony, and remand with directions that the trial court vacate that conviction. See, e.g., M.P. v. State, 682 So.2d 79 (Fla.1996); State v. Brown, 633 So.2d 1059 (Fla.1994); Cleveland v. State, 587 So.2d 1145 (Fla.1991). In all other respects, we affirm.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; and REMANDED, with directions.

WEBSTER, MICKLE and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.

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

Roy v. State, 693 So. 2d 63, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3239, 1997 WL 163033 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

693 So. 2d 63 (Roy v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Roy v. State
711 So. 2d 1348 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Britt v. State
742 So. 2d 286 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)