CHARLES B. STRIPLING, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Accomplice Liability cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The order denying appellant’s motion for postconviction relief is affirmed. As to the second issue, defendant was properly convicted of armed robbery under section 812.13(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1989). The State need only show that defendant’s participation in the crime satisfied section 777.011, Florida Statutes (1989). The State need not show that defendant personally possessed the firearm. See id.; State v. McQuay, 403 So. 2d 566, 568 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Norris v. State, 360 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).*
Affirmed.
*
A different rule applies where section 775.087, Florida Statutes, is used to enhance the felony or impose a three-year mandatory minimum sentence. See State v. Rodriguez, 602 So. 2d 1270, 1271-72 (Fla. 1992); Earnest v. State, 351 So. 2d 957, 958-59 (Fla. 1977); Stripling v. State, 602 So. 2d 663, 665 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Alfred v. State, 678 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Stripling v. State, 645 So. 2d 589 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994).…
-
Baker v. State, 760 So. 2d 1085 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…r, or that Cokley shot him, with Baker’s assistance, encouragement, and expectation. If not the shooter, sufficient evidence established Baker was a principal to both crimes. Christie v. State, 652 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Stripling v. State, 645 So. 2d 589 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Douglas v. State, 214 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968) (evidence viewed in a light most favorable to conclusion of fact finder). As part of the defense’s case, Cokley testified that he and he alone had the idea to shoot Pedro. But…
-
Romero v. State, 315 So. 3d 1245 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)…Romero used or whether he was the one who inflicted the fatal blows. And Romero could have been convicted of robbery with a deadly weapon as a principal even if the jury did not believe he had actual possession of the weapon. See Stripling v. State, 645 So. 2d 589, 590 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (holding that a defendant can be convicted as a principal to armed robbery even if they do not actually possess the firearm during the robbery); see also Freeny v. State, 621 So. 2d 505, 506 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993) (reaffirming…
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
- Earnest v. State, 351 So. 2d 957 (Fla. 1977)
- State v. Anibal Rodriguez, 602 So. 2d 1270 (Fla. 1992)
- State v. McQUAY, 403 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Norris v. State, 360 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- Duncan v. State, 602 So. 2d 663 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)
- Stripling v. State, 602 So. 2d 663 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)