Grubbs v. State, 5D99-3319.
Decision Date | 29 September 2000 |
Docket Number | No. 5D99-3319.,5D99-3319. |
Parties | Fred GRUBBS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Marvin F. Clegg, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Allison Leigh Morris, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee. ORFINGER, M., Senior Judge.
The defendant appeals his conviction for attempted burglary of a conveyance asserting that his conviction violates his double jeopardy rights because he was earlier convicted of a misdemeanor charge of criminal mischief which arose out of the same criminal episode.
The defendant was arrested for burglary of a conveyance after he was observed breaking the window of an unoccupied vehicle with a rock. He was charged in the circuit court with the felony of attempted burglary of a conveyance. The defendant had been previously charged in a county court case with criminal mischief arising out of this same factual situation. The defendant entered a plea and was convicted on the county court criminal mischief charge. In pleading nolo contendere to the attempted burglary charge, the defendant reserved for appeal the dispositive double jeopardy issue, asserting that a conviction for attempted burglary was barred by his earlier criminal mischief conviction.
Initially, under Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932) analysis there is no double jeopardy violation in convicting the defendant for both attempted burglary of a conveyance and criminal mischief. In section 775.021(4)(b), Florida Statutes, the legislature expressed its intent that there be a separate conviction and sentence for each criminal offense, unless one of the offenses is a degree of the other, a necessarily included offense subsumed in the other, or both offenses are identical. See McAllister v. State, 718 So.2d 917 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)
. Although these crimes arose from one single factual episode each contains an element of proof not required in the other. See Tarpley v. Dugger, 841 F.2d 359 (11th Cir.1988) ( ).
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Grubbs v. State, 5D99-3535.
...Demurjian v. State, 727 So.2d 324 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). AFFIRMED. THOMPSON, C.J., and GRIFFIN, J., concur. 1.See Grubbs v. State, 771 So.2d 49 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (Grubbs I). ...