Williams v. State

596 So. 2d 1148, 1992 WL 88480

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 20, 1992·No. No. 91-00507·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Gayman v. State, 584 So.2d 632 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). We agree with Gayman and thus certify to the Florida Supreme Court the following question of great public importance:

WHETHER THE DOUBLE JEOPARDY CLAUSES OF THE UNITED STATES AND FLORIDA CONSTITUTIONS WERE VIOLATED BY THE TRIAL COURT’S RECLASSIFYING APPELLANT’S OFFENSE AS FELONY PETIT THEFT, THEN USING THAT FELONY CLASSIFICATION TO ENHANCE APPELLANT’S SENTENCE PURSUANT TO THE HABITUAL VIOLENT FELONY OFFENDER STATUTE.

LEHAN, A.C.J., and FRANK and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Gayman v. State, 584 So.2d 632 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). We agree with Gayman and thus certify to the Florida Supreme Court the following question of great public importance:

WHETHER THE DOUBLE JEOPARDY CLAUSES OF THE UNITED STATES AND FLORIDA CONSTITUTIONS WERE VIOLATED BY THE TRIAL COURT’S RECLASSIFYING APPELLANT’S OFFENSE AS FELONY PETIT THEFT, THEN USING THAT FELONY CLASSIFICATION TO ENHANCE APPELLANT’S SENTENCE PURSUANT TO THE HABITUAL VIOLENT FELONY OFFENDER STATUTE.

LEHAN, A.C.J., and FRANK and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

Williams v. State, 596 So. 2d 1148, 1992 WL 88480 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

596 So. 2d 1148 (Williams v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Gayman v. State

616 So. 2d 17 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1993)

Smith v. State

609 So. 2d 148 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)

Mills v. State

596 So. 2d 1148 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)

Opinion

Related