Schulkin v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Schulkin v. State

287 So. 2d 137, 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 6154

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 18, 1973

DocketNo. 73-351

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 287 So. 2d 137 (Schulkin 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

Schulkin v. State, 287 So. 2d 137, 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 6154 (Fla. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was charged by information with one count of possession and one count of the sale of a hallucinogenic drug known as LSD. Following jury trial, a verdict of guilty was rendered, judgment was entered, and he was sentenced to five years on each count, the sentences to run concurrently. This appeal ensued.

Several points are urged for reversal : First, that the trial court erred in not discharging the defendant in the trial court because he was not brought to trial within the provisions of Rule 3.191 CrPR, 33 F. S.A. [the speedy trial rule]. We find no merit in this position because the defendant never brought this contention to the attention of the trial judge by appropriate motion or argument. State v. Earnest, Fla.App. 1972, 265 So.2d 397; Morris v. State, Fla.App. 1972, 267 So.2d 99; Rules 3.191(a)(1), 3.191(d)(1), CrPR.¹

[138]*138Next, it is urged that the trial judge erred in certain instructions relative to a reference to a confidential informant by a witness for the State. It is apparent, from a review of the entire trial transcript, that the trial judge committed no error in the instruction he gave to the jury to disregard any reference to any confidential informant. Stewart v. State, Fla.App.1969, 221 So.2d 155; Williams v. State, Fla.App. 1971, 243 So.2d 215.

Lastly, it is urged that it was error to sentence the defendant on both the conviction for possession and sale, when they arose out of the same incident, citing Yost v. State, Fla.App.1971, 243 So.2d 469. The State concurs -yvith the appellant in this position and, therefore, the sentence of five years on the count of possession be and the same is hereby set aside.

In all other respects, the judgments of conviction be and the same are hereby affirmed. The sentence on the sale is affirmed; the sentence on the possession is set aside.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was charged by information with one count of possession and one count of the sale of a hallucinogenic drug known as LSD. Following jury trial, a verdict of guilty was rendered, judgment was entered, and he was sentenced to five years on each count, the sentences to run concurrently. This appeal ensued.

Several points are urged for reversal : First, that the trial court erred in not discharging the defendant in the trial court because he was not brought to trial within the provisions of Rule 3.191 CrPR, 33 F. S.A. [the speedy trial rule]. We find no merit in this position because the defendant never brought this contention to the attention of the trial judge by appropriate motion or argument. State v. Earnest, Fla.App. 1972, 265 So.2d 397; Morris v. State, Fla.App. 1972, 267 So.2d 99; Rules 3.191(a)(1), 3.191(d)(1), CrPR.¹

[138]*138Next, it is urged that the trial judge erred in certain instructions relative to a reference to a confidential informant by a witness for the State. It is apparent, from a review of the entire trial transcript, that the trial judge committed no error in the instruction he gave to the jury to disregard any reference to any confidential informant. Stewart v. State, Fla.App.1969, 221 So.2d 155; Williams v. State, Fla.App. 1971, 243 So.2d 215.

Lastly, it is urged that it was error to sentence the defendant on both the conviction for possession and sale, when they arose out of the same incident, citing Yost v. State, Fla.App.1971, 243 So.2d 469. The State concurs -yvith the appellant in this position and, therefore, the sentence of five years on the count of possession be and the same is hereby set aside.

In all other respects, the judgments of conviction be and the same are hereby affirmed. The sentence on the sale is affirmed; the sentence on the possession is set aside.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

287 So. 2d 137, 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 6154, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schulkin-v-state-fladistctapp-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack