ANTONIO GUERRA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Antonio Guerra appealed his multiple convictions, challenging the trial judge's rulings on peremptory challenges, confession admissibility, sufficiency of evidence, and jury instructions. The appellate court affirmed all convictions and most sentences but remanded for correction of an erroneous imposition of five consecutive mandatory minimum sentences, requiring only two consecutive mandatory minimums based on the distinct incidents involved.
The court held that: (a) the trial judge properly found no racial motivation in the state's peremptory challenges; (b) the motion to suppress the confession was properly denied; (c) evidence sufficiently supported the false imprisonment conviction; (d) failure to instruct on justifiable and excusable homicide was not fundamental error; (e) upward deviation sentences were proper; but (f) only two consecutive mandatory minimum sentences should have been imposed rather than five, since counts I and II arose from one incident and counts III, IV, and V from another distinct incident.
[1] A trial judge does not err in concluding that peremptory challenges were not racially motivated when supported by the record.
[2] A motion to suppress a confession on the ground of involuntariness is properly denied if the confession was voluntary.
Previewing 2 of 6 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the trial judge did not err in concluding that the state's peremptory challenges were not racially motivated”
Establishes that the appellate court found no error in the trial judge's determination that peremptory challenges were exercised without racial discrimination.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGuerra was convicted of multiple offenses arising from two distinct incidents. The state exercised peremptory challenges during jury selection. Guerra…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Multiple Convictions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Rejecting each of the appellant’s claims of error with respect to his multiple convictions, we hold that (a) the trial judge did not err in concluding that the state’s peremptory challenges were not racially motivated, see Davis v. State, 560 So. 2d 1346 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Knight v. State, 559 So. 2d 327 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), review denied, 574 So. 2d 141 (Fla.1990); (b) the motion to suppress the defendant’s confession on the ground of involuntariness was properly denied; (c) the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction of false imprisonment, see Perez v. State, 566 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); and (d) the court’s failure to elucidate the concepts of justifiable and excusable homicide was not fundamental error. State v. Delva, 575 So. 2d 643 (Fla.1991); Williams v. State, 400 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1149, 103 S.Ct. 793, 74 L.Ed.2d 998 (1983).
We similarly find no error in the imposition of sentences in upward deviation from the guidelines. See Salazar v. State, 560 So. 2d 1207 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990), cause dismissed, 567 So. 2d 435 (Fla.1990); Baker v. State, 466 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), aff'd, 483 So. 2d 423 (Fla.1986); see also State v. Simpson, 554 So. 2d 506 (Fla.1989). We do conclude, as the state concedes, that the court erroneously imposed five consecutive mandatory minimum sentences under section 775.087, Florida Statutes (1989). Since counts I and II arose out of one incident; and counts III, IV and V, out of another distinct one, only two consecutive minimum mandatory provisions should have been imposed. See Junco v. State, 510 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), review denied, 518 So. 2d 1276 (Fla.1987). The cause is remanded solely for correction of the sentences accordingly. Otherwise, the convictions and sentences are entirely affirmed.
Affirmed, remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited (13 total)
- D'Angelo v. State, 575 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 1991)
- State v. Batraville Vincent Delva, 575 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 1991)
- Williams v. State, 400 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- State v. Vaughn R. Simpson, 554 So. 2d 506 (Fla. 1989)
- Terence A. Baker v. State, 466 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
- State v. Terence A. Baker, 483 So. 2d 423 (Fla. 1986)
- Perez v. State, 566 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Americo Junco and Ernesto R. Esquivel v. State, 510 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
- Knight v. State, 559 So. 2d 327 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Rogers v. Trigg, 459 U.S. 1149 (U.S. 1983)