SOLOMON MCCLUSTER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1996-03-29
No. 95-05004
RYDER, A.C.J., and DANAHY and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.
681 So. 2d 716 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1996) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

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.

Synopsis

Solomon McCluster challenged his convictions following guilty pleas to two trafficking counts and one possession count. The Florida appellate court reversed in part, finding that the simple possession charge and one trafficking charge were based on the same contraband, violating double jeopardy principles, and remanded for the trial court to vacate the possession conviction if the record continues to support this conclusion.


Holding

The court held that double jeopardy principles forbid convictions for trafficking and simple possession based on possession of the same contraband. The possession conviction must be vacated if the trial court on remand finds the record supports that both charges involved identical contraband. As this was a negotiated plea, either party may seek to have the plea set aside and proceed to trial.


Headnotes

[1] Double jeopardy principles forbid convictions for trafficking and simple possession based upon the possession of only one lot of contraband.

[2] Claims asserting violations of double jeopardy are cognizable in a collateral proceeding.

Previewing 2 of 5 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

Key Quotes

“Principles of double jeopardy forbid convictions for trafficking and simple possession based upon the possession of only one lot of contraband.”

Establishes the core legal principle that dual convictions from a single seizure violate double jeopardy protection.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

McCluster was arrested for trafficking in cocaine after law enforcement surveillance discovered contraband in his vehicle. While being processed, auth…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Soloman McCluster challenges the denial of his posteonviction motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Of the many issues raised in his motion only one merits our attention, upon which we reverse.

Guilty pleas were accepted by the court to two counts of traffickmg in cocaine and one count of possession of cocaine. At the time of the plea, the state agreed to reduce in severity the grade of trafficking involved resulting in a less severe mandatory minimum sentence, and it concurred as well in a downward departure sentence. McCluster raises questions about the viability of his conviction and sentence for the simple possession charge, which, if sustained, may vitiate the plea agreement he entered into.

According to the incomplete record before us it appears that appellant was arrested for trafficking in cocaine in association with a law enforcement surveillance of his vehicle and the discovery of contraband in or around that vehicle. Thereafter, while appellant was being processed for the arrest, authorities obtained the consent of his girlfriend and searched his apartment, uncovering a separate quantity of cocaine of sufficient weight to sustain a second trafficking charge. We see no irregularities in trafficking convictions growing out of these two distinct episodes. Appellant does assert, however, and the record nowhere refutes, that the simple possession charge involves the same drugs which gave rise to the trafficking count based upon the seizure at the time of the search of the automobile.

The factual basis provided at the time of the plea provides nothing to dissuade us from this view. Principles of double jeopardy forbid convictions for trafficking and simple possession based upon the possession of only one lot of contraband. Thorpe v. State, 559 So. 2d 1285 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Lee v. State, 526 So. 2d 777 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). Claims asserting violations of double jeopardy are cognizable in a collateral proceeding such as is under review here. Plowman v. State, 586 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991).

Trafficking in illegal drugs can be proven in a variety of ways: sale, possession, manufacture, delivery and bringing into this state. § 893.135, Fla.Stat. (1993). Simple possession is not a necessarily lesser included offense of trafficking by delivery, or sale, or any alternate accusation besides possession. State v. Daophin, 533 So. 2d 761 (Fla.1988). And jeopardy restraints would not forbid the conviction of simple possession and trafficking if charged (and proven) by any means besides possession.

By the terms of the factual basis recited at the time of the plea, and without any of the charging documents before us, we can reach no conclusion but that McCluster pleaded guilty and was convicted of both trafficking in and possession of cocaine for possessing the very same contraband.

If the record fails to refute this conclusion upon remand, McCluster is entitled to have his conviction and sentence for possession of cocaine vacated. And, as this was a negotiated plea, either party would have the right to have the plea set aside and proceed to trial.

Should the trial court again deny the motion after remand, appellant must seek review of that order within thirty days.

Reversed in part, affirmed in part, and remanded.

RYDER, A.C.J., and DANAHY and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Cintron v. U.S. Attorney General, 882 F.3d 1380 (11th Cir. 2018)
    …ug in specified quantities."); Cogbill v. State , 940 So. 2d 537, 539 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006) ("[ Section 893.135(f) ] sets forth a number of alternate forms of conduct, any of which constitute the proscribed offense."); McCluster v. State , 681 So. 2d 716, 717 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996) ("Trafficking in illegal drugs can be proven in a variety of ways: sale, possession, manufacture, delivery and bringing into this state."); Ramos v. State , 529 So. 2d 807, 808 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988) ("[T]r…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw