Giles v. State, 98-4390.

Decision Date26 January 2000
Docket NumberNo. 98-4390.,98-4390.
Citation763 So.2d 1178
PartiesDarryl GILES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Sophia Letts, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Carol Cobourn Asbury, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

HAZOURI, J.

Darryl Giles (Giles) was charged by a multi-count information with the following: count I, attempted second degree murder with a firearm (Officer Grant); count II, attempt to deprive an officer of his weapon (Officer Grant); count III, battery on a law enforcement officer (Officer Grant); count IV, battery on a law enforcement officer (Officer Burns); count V, resisting arrest with violence; count VI, possession of cocaine; count VII, possession of hydrocodone, and count VIII, attempted tampering with physical evidence. At the close of the state's case, Giles moved for a judgment of acquittal on the charge of attempted second degree murder with a firearm arguing that there had been no evidence of the use of a firearm and that the charge should be reduced to attempted second degree murder. The trial court granted the motion. Upon submission to the jury, Giles was convicted of battery as a lesser included offense of attempted second degree murder of Officer Grant; battery on a law enforcement officer (Officer Grant); resisting arrest with violence; possession of cocaine; possession of hydrocodone; and attempted tampering with evidence. Giles was acquitted on counts II and IV. Giles was sentenced on each of the counts for which he was convicted.

Giles raises three points on appeal. First, the trial court erred in convicting and sentencing Giles for both battery as a lesser included offense of attempted second degree murder and battery on a law enforcement officer (Officer Grant) because it involved the same victim in the same criminal episode and thus constituted double jeopardy. Second, the trial court erred in permitting the state to peremptorily strike three black jurors. Third, Giles's sentence was based on an incorrectly calculated score sheet and therefore was an illegal sentence and the trial court did not give Giles full credit for time served. We find point two without merit but reverse on points one and three.

As to the first point on appeal, Giles was convicted of battery as a lesser included offense of attempted second...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Valle v. State, 99-3854.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 26 Enero 2000
  • Haynes v. State, 4D01-3705.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 16 Octubre 2002
    ...of the very same act on which the simple battery conviction is based, the two convictions violate double jeopardy. Giles v. State, 763 So.2d 1178 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). We disagree with the state's argument that appellant waived this issue by requesting the jury instruction on simple battery ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT