Stacey v. State
83 So. 3d 749, 2011 WL 2650875, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 10649
Opinion
We affirm Appellant’s convictions and sentences for conspiracy to traffic in 200 grams or more of methamphetamine; trafficking in 200 grams or more of methamphetamine; possession of listed chemical; and tampering with physical evidence. On each of these counts the circumstantial proof was sufficient to support the jury verdict. Based upon double jeopardy grounds, we vacate the conviction and sentence for manufacture of methamphetamine. Ford v. State, 749 So.2d 570 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000).
AFFIRMED IN PART; VACATED IN PART.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Stacey v. State, 83 So. 3d 749, 2011 WL 2650875, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 10649 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).
83 So. 3d 749 (Stacey v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Perez-Riva v. State
152 So. 3d 98 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)
Odom v. State
104 So. 3d 1238 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2012)
Fonseca v. State
114 So. 3d 1010 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2012)