Sands v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Sands v. State

542 So. 2d 436, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1070, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 2273, 1989 WL 41167

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 26, 1989·No. No. 88-00168·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

FRANK, Judge.

The appellant, Paul L. Sands, appeals from convictions for robbery with a weapon and assault, alleging that the dual convictions constitute a double jeopardy violation. He is correct.

In Richardson v. State, 523 So.2d 746 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988), the fifth district was presented with an identical set of facts. The court ruled that the conviction for assault could not stand because it is a necessarily lesser included offense of robbery with a weapon. Id. at 747. We agree.

The appellant’s conviction and sentence for assault are reversed. We affirm the appellant’s conviction and sentence for robbery with a weapon.

RYDER, A.C.J., and DANAHY, J., concur.

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

FRANK, Judge.

The appellant, Paul L. Sands, appeals from convictions for robbery with a weapon and assault, alleging that the dual convictions constitute a double jeopardy violation. He is correct.

In Richardson v. State, 523 So.2d 746 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988), the fifth district was presented with an identical set of facts. The court ruled that the conviction for assault could not stand because it is a necessarily lesser included offense of robbery with a weapon. Id. at 747. We agree.

The appellant’s conviction and sentence for assault are reversed. We affirm the appellant’s conviction and sentence for robbery with a weapon.

RYDER, A.C.J., and DANAHY, J., concur.

Sands v. State, 542 So. 2d 436, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1070, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 2273, 1989 WL 41167 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

542 So. 2d 436 (Sands v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related