EUGENIO TORRES, 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.
The court held that imposing concurrent sentences for two offenses arising from the same transaction constitutes error.
Appellant was charged with unlawful sale and unlawful possession of a narcotic drug, convicted on both counts, and sentenced to concurrent prison term…
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 Unlawful Possession Of A Narcotic Drug cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant, in an information containing two counts, was charged with the crimes of unlawful sale of a narcotic drug and unlawful possession of a narcotic drug. He was adjudicated guilty and sentenced to concurrent three year terms in the state prison. This appeal followed.
The State agrees that the convictions arise out of the same transaction and are based on the same facts. The State further confesses error under the law as stated in Yost v. State, Fla.App.1971, 243 So.2d 469, and Wyche v. State, Fla.App.1965, 178 So.2d 875.
We have examined the record and the cases cited and find that the sentence imposed upon the lesser count, unlawful possession of a narcotic drug, constitutes error. Therefore, the judgment and sentence appealed is affirmed in part and reversed in part. The adjudication and sentence to three years in the state prison for unlawful sale of a narcotic drug is affirmed. The adjudication and sentence of three years to run concurrently for unlawful possession of a narcotic drug is reversed.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for the entry of an amended adjudication and sentence.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Scaldeferri v. State, 294 So. 2d 407 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)…09. But as conceded by the State, where it is obvious that the two convictions are but separate facets of the same transactions, only one sentence should be imposed, and that for the highest offense charged and proved. Torres v. State, Fla.App.1972, 262 So. 2d 458; Davis v. State, Fla.App.1973, 277 So. 2d 300. Accordingly, the judgments are affirmed, the sentence of each defendant for conspiracy to commit grand larceny is reversed and all other sentences are affirmed. Affirmed.…
-
Orange v. State, 334 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)…delivery of possession made simultaneously or contemporaneously with the sale. Yost v. State, Fla.App.1971, 243 So. 2d 469; Easton v. State, Fla.App.1971, 250 So. 2d 294; Martin v. State, Fla.App.1971, 251 So. 2d 283; Torres v. State, Fla.App. 1972, 262 So. 2d 458; Brown v. State, Fla.App.1972, 264 So. 2d 28; Gonzales v. State, Fla.App. 1972, 268 So. 2d 552; Kwasniewski v. State, Fla.App.1974, 303 So. 2d 373. The lone case to the contrary in such situation is Parker v. State, Fla.App. 1970, 237 So. 2d 253, de…
-
Robinson v. State, 325 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)…nformation contains more than one count, but each is a part of the same transaction only one sentence should be imposed, and that sentence should be for the highest offense charged. Yost v. State, 243 So. 2d 469 (Fla.App. 3rd 1971); Torres v. State, 262 So. 2d 458 (Fla.App. 3rd 1972). See also, Shaw v. State, 264 So. 2d 95 (Fla.App.lst 1972); Brown v. State, 264 So. 2d 28 (Fla.App. 1st 1972) and Johnson v. State, 260 So. 2d 212 (Fla.App. 1st 1972). Affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded' for furt…
Authorities Cited
- Yost v. State, 243 So. 2d 469 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)
- Edmond Wyche v. State, 178 So. 2d 875 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965)