State v. Hunter

Supreme Court of Florida

State v. Hunter

689 So. 2d 1066, 22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 128, 1997 Fla. LEXIS 302, 1997 WL 109657

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedMarch 13, 1997

DocketNo. 88076

StatusPublished

This text of 689 So. 2d 1066 (State v. Hunter) 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.

Bluebook

State v. Hunter, 689 So. 2d 1066, 22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 128, 1997 Fla. LEXIS 302, 1997 WL 109657 (Fla. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

WELLS, Justice.

We have for review Hunter v. State, 685 So.2d 1332 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996), which addresses the same issue which we recently resolved in Gaber v. State, 684 So.2d 189 (Fla.1996). We have jurisdiction. Art. Y, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.

In Hunter, the defendant was convicted at trial of, among other charges, two counts of armed burglary, section 810.02(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1993), and one count of grand theft of a firearm, section 812.014(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1993), for events arising from the same criminal episode. On appeal to the Second District, the court relied on Marrow v. State, 656 So.2d 579 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 664 So.2d 249 (Fla.1995), and found that double jeopardy precluded the conviction for both charges where the act of stealing a firearm converted the burglary into an armed burglary. Hunter, 685 So.2d at 1332. Consequently, the court vacated the conviction for grand theft of a firearm.

In Gaber, we confronted the same issue as Hunter but resolved the issue to the contrary. There, we disapproved Marrow and held that double jeopardy does not preclude separate convictions because grand theft and armed burglary have separate statutory elements. Gaber. In accordance with our decision in Gaber, we quash the district court’s decision in this case and remand with directions that the defendant’s conviction for grand theft of a firearm be affirmed.¹

It is so ordered.

KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, GRIMES, HARDING and ANSTEAD, JJ„ concur.

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

WELLS, Justice.

We have for review Hunter v. State, 685 So.2d 1332 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996), which addresses the same issue which we recently resolved in Gaber v. State, 684 So.2d 189 (Fla.1996). We have jurisdiction. Art. Y, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.

In Hunter, the defendant was convicted at trial of, among other charges, two counts of armed burglary, section 810.02(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1993), and one count of grand theft of a firearm, section 812.014(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1993), for events arising from the same criminal episode. On appeal to the Second District, the court relied on Marrow v. State, 656 So.2d 579 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 664 So.2d 249 (Fla.1995), and found that double jeopardy precluded the conviction for both charges where the act of stealing a firearm converted the burglary into an armed burglary. Hunter, 685 So.2d at 1332. Consequently, the court vacated the conviction for grand theft of a firearm.

In Gaber, we confronted the same issue as Hunter but resolved the issue to the contrary. There, we disapproved Marrow and held that double jeopardy does not preclude separate convictions because grand theft and armed burglary have separate statutory elements. Gaber. In accordance with our decision in Gaber, we quash the district court’s decision in this case and remand with directions that the defendant’s conviction for grand theft of a firearm be affirmed.¹

It is so ordered.

KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, GRIMES, HARDING and ANSTEAD, JJ„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

689 So. 2d 1066, 22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 128, 1997 Fla. LEXIS 302, 1997 WL 109657, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hunter-fla-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack