State v. Foreman
This text of 476 So. 2d 662 (State v. Foreman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
STATE of Florida, Petitioner, Cross-Respondent,
v.
William FOREMAN, Respondent, Cross-Petitioner.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Davis G. Anderson, Jr., Tampa, for petitioner, cross-respondent.
*663 James Marion Moorman, Public Defender and Deborah K. Brueckheimer, Asst. Public Defender, Tenth Judicial Circuit, Clearwater, for respondent, cross-petitioner.
EHRLICH, Justice.
We took jurisdiction in this case to answer a question certified to be of great public importance in Foreman v. State, 458 So.2d 1213 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). Art. V, § 3(b)(5), Fla. Const.
The question certified is:
MAY A DEFENDANT BE CONVICTED AND SENTENCED FOR BOTH SEXUAL BATTERY AND FIRST DEGREE BURGLARY PUNISHABLE BY LIFE (WHICH IS ENHANCED FROM BURGLARY TO FIRST DEGREE BURGLARY PUNISHABLE BY LIFE BY REASON OF THE COMMISSION OF ASSAULT OR BATTERY IN THE COURSE OF THE BURGLARY) WHEN THE SEXUAL BATTERY IS THE SAME CONDUCT ON THE BASIS OF WHICH THE BURGLARY CHARGE IS SO ENHANCED?
On the authority of Wicker v. State, 462 So.2d 461 (Fla. 1985), we answer the question in the affirmative and quash the decision of the district court. We remand for further proceedings in accord with this opinion.
It is so ordered.
BOYD, C.J., and ADKINS, McDONALD and SHAW, JJ., concur.
OVERTON, J., dissents.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
476 So. 2d 662, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 531, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-foreman-fla-1985.