WILLIAM SHEARER, APPELLANT,
v.
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.
Court reversed conviction for petit theft where theft and fencing arose from same course of conduct, but affirmed imposition of statutorily mandated costs without requiring individual notice and hearing.
When theft and dealing in stolen property arise from the same course of conduct or scheme, the conviction for the lesser crime of petit theft must be reversed.
[1] When theft and dealing in stolen property arise from the same course of conduct or scheme, conviction for the lesser crime of petit theft must be reversed to avoid cumula…
[2] Constructive notice of statutorily mandated costs is provided by the statute itself, and opportunity to be heard is provided at the sentencing hearing.
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceShearer was convicted of dealing in stolen property (a camera) and petit theft (camera, luggage, and clothing) on June 20, 1989. Both crimes arose fro…
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 Cumulative Punishment cases and more on FLexlaw
PETERSON, Judge.
William Shearer was convicted, as charged, of dealing in stolen property, to-wit: a camera, on June 20, 1989, and of petit theft involving the camera, luggage, and clothing on June 20, 1989. Because the theft arose out of the same course of conduct or scheme as the fencing crime, we reverse and set aside the conviction and sentence for the lesser crime of petit theft. W.J. v. State, 485 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Ridley v. State, 407 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); § 812.025, Fla.Stat. (1989).
We affirm the order imposing costs. The court imposed statutorily mandated costs,1 and appellant argues that the imposition was improper in that he was not provided notice and opportunity to be heard. Since the parties filed their briefs, the supreme court decided State v. Beasley, 580 So. 2d 139 (Fla.1991). In Beasley, the court held that constructive notice of statutorily mandated costs is provided by the statute mandating the costs. Opportunity to be heard is provided at the sentencing hearing. On the authority of Beasley, then, we affirm the order imposing costs.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part.
HARRIS, J., concurs.
W. SHARP, J., dissents with opinion.
. Costs were imposed pursuant to sections 943.-25(3), 943.25(13), 960.20, and 27.3455, Florida Statutes.
W. SHARP, Judge
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. Section 812.025, Florida Statutes (1989) prohibits conviction for both theft and dealing in stolen property “in connection with one scheme or course of conduct.” See Ridley v. State, 407 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). However, the two counts must involve the same property. Duncan v. State, 503 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).
Here, the dealing count charged appellant with selling a stolen camera, and the petit theft count involved a suitcase and clothing as well as the camera. Since the two crimes involved different properties, section 812.025 does not apply, in my view. I would affirm the judgment in full.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
T.S.R. v. State, 596 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)…rovided that convictions for these two offenses are in the alternative and has prohibited convictions for both offenses, when they relate to the same stolen property and the same defendant, in section 812.025, Florida Statutes. See Shearer v. State, 582 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); W.J. v. State, 485 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Lennear v. State, 424 So. 2d 151 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Kelly v. State, 397 So. 2d 709 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Ridley v. State, 407 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Duncan v. State, 5…
-
Maury Barnlund v. State, 724 So. 2d 632 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)…n located. . Scorpio v. State, 717 So. 2d 1122 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); L.E.S. v. State, 693 So. 2d 141 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Almulla v. State, 677 So. 2d 987 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996); Hernandez v. State, 636 So. 2d 605 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Shearer v. State, 582 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); Ridley v. State, 407 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981).…
-
Obeid Mohamad Almulla v. State, 677 So. 2d 987 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)…(§ 812.014, Fla.Stat.) in connection with one scheme or course of conduct was improper. See, Hernandez v. State, 636 So. 2d 605 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994) (citing, § 812.025, Fla. Stat.; T.S.R. v. State, 596 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); Shearer v. State 582 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); Duncan v. State, 503 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); W.J. v. State, 485 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Ridley v. State, 407 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)). Accordingly, we reverse the conviction and sentence for dealing in stol…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Beasley, 580 So. 2d 139 (Fla. 1991)
- Ridley v. State, 407 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
- Jollie v. State, 407 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
- W.J. v. State, 485 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)
- Alphonso Chandler v. State, 503 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- Duncan v. State, 503 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)