Velazquez v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Velazquez v. State

103 So. 3d 1039, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 22151, 2012 WL 6719468

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 28, 2012

DocketNo. 5D12-95

StatusPublished

This text of 103 So. 3d 1039 (Velazquez 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

Velazquez v. State, 103 So. 3d 1039, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 22151, 2012 WL 6719468 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Antonio Garcia Velazquez timely appeals his convictions for two counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. He argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to continue the trial, and in entering a judgment for aggravated assault on count one when the jury’s verdict was for simple assault. We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s denial of Velazquez’ motion for continuance. However, as the State concedes on appeal, the trial court entered judgment for the wrong crime as to count one. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment as to count one and remand with directions that the judgment be corrected to accurately reflect that the jury found Velazquez guilty of simple assault as to that count. In all other respects, we affirm.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

EVANDER, LAWSON and COHEN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Antonio Garcia Velazquez timely appeals his convictions for two counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. He argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to continue the trial, and in entering a judgment for aggravated assault on count one when the jury’s verdict was for simple assault. We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s denial of Velazquez’ motion for continuance. However, as the State concedes on appeal, the trial court entered judgment for the wrong crime as to count one. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment as to count one and remand with directions that the judgment be corrected to accurately reflect that the jury found Velazquez guilty of simple assault as to that count. In all other respects, we affirm.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

EVANDER, LAWSON and COHEN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

103 So. 3d 1039, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 22151, 2012 WL 6719468, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/velazquez-v-state-fladistctapp-2012.