Senato v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Senato v. State

546 So. 2d 1177, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1860, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4389, 1989 WL 86795

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 2, 1989

DocketNo. 88-2711

StatusPublished

This text of 546 So. 2d 1177 (Senato 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

Senato v. State, 546 So. 2d 1177, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1860, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4389, 1989 WL 86795 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

HALL, Judge.

We find no merit in the issues raised by the appellant, John Senato, in this appeal, and we affirm his convictions for possession of, conspiracy to traffic in, and trafficking in cocaine. However, because we cannot determine from the record before us whether Senate’s convictions for possession and trafficking arose from a single act and whether, therefore, his double jeopardy rights were violated, see Lee v. State, 526 So.2d 777 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988), and because no double jeopardy objection was made in the trial court, we affirm Senate’s convictions for these two offenses without prejudice to Senato seeking relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Watts v. State, 541 So.2d 1208 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988).

Affirmed.

FRANK, A.C.J., and PARKER, J., concur.

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

HALL, Judge.

We find no merit in the issues raised by the appellant, John Senato, in this appeal, and we affirm his convictions for possession of, conspiracy to traffic in, and trafficking in cocaine. However, because we cannot determine from the record before us whether Senate’s convictions for possession and trafficking arose from a single act and whether, therefore, his double jeopardy rights were violated, see Lee v. State, 526 So.2d 777 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988), and because no double jeopardy objection was made in the trial court, we affirm Senate’s convictions for these two offenses without prejudice to Senato seeking relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Watts v. State, 541 So.2d 1208 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988).

Affirmed.

FRANK, A.C.J., and PARKER, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

546 So. 2d 1177, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1860, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4389, 1989 WL 86795, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/senato-v-state-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack