State v. Gillette
This text of 580 So. 2d 614 (State v. Gillette) 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,
v.
James Howard GILLETTE, Respondent.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Wendy Buffington and Peggy A. Quince, Asst. Attys. Gen., Tampa, for petitioner.
Dwight M. Wells, Tampa, for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
We granted review of Gillette v. State, 571 So.2d 600, 600 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), to answer the following certified question of great public importance:
When a double jeopardy violation is alleged based on the crimes of sale and possession (or possession with intent to sell) of the same quantum of contraband and the crimes occurred after the effective date of section 775.021, Florida Statutes (1988 Supp.), is it improper to convict and sentence for both crimes?
We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution. We answered this question in the negative in State v. McCloud, 577 So.2d 939 (Fla. 1991), and State v. V.A.A., 577 So.2d 941 (Fla. 1991). Therefore, we quash the opinion under review with instructions to affirm the conviction and sentence for possession of cocaine.
It is so ordered.
SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, McDONALD, BARKETT, GRIMES, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
580 So. 2d 614, 1991 WL 101174, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-gillette-fla-1991.