State v. Heisterman
| Citation | 343 So.2d 1272 |
| Decision Date | 17 March 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 49279,49279 |
| Parties | The STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Robert Jacob HEISTERMAN, Respondent. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Florida |
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Linda Collins Hertz and Ira N. Loewy, Asst. Attys. Gen., for petitioner.
John J. Quinn, Key West, for respondent.
We here review the decision of the Third District Court of Appeal, reported at 327 So.2d 839, insofar as it holds that respondent was improperly convicted and sentenced for two separate offenses because 'the facts proved (at trial constitute) only one criminal act . . ..' 1
The respondent was convicted and sentenced for shooting a gun into an occupied dwelling, in violation of Section 790.19, Florida Statutes (1973), and for assault with intent to commit murder, in violation of Section 784.06, Florida Statutes (1973). The salient facts of the episode leading to these convictions are that respondent stood outside a dwelling occupied by a Mr. and Mrs. Simmons, yelled (apparently to Mr. Simmons), 'come on out, I'm going to kill you' and then, when Simmons did not venture out, fired six shots from a pistol at the windows from which the Simmons peered in terror.
The state suggests, and we agree, that respondent committed two distinct crimes for which convictions and sentences were appropriate. The acts constituting assault under the statute were completed when respondent verbally threatened the Simmons, pointed a pistol in their direction, and put them in fear. This crime was proved without evidence that any shots were fired. See State v. White, 324 So.2d 630 (Fla.1975); Caraker v. State, 84 So.2d 50 (Fla.1955). Respondent's other conviction was based on adequate evidence that several shots were in fact fired into the house around the window area.
The convictions and sentences imposed by the trial judge were lawful. The case is remanded with instructions to reinstate the judgment and sentence imposed by the trial court for shooting into an occupied dwelling in violation of Section 790.19.
It is so ordered.
1 The decision conflicts with Estevez v. State, 313 So.2d 692 (Fla.1975), among other cases.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Borges v. State
...times at the identity or discreteness of the evidentiary proof. See, e.g., Johnson v. State, 366 So.2d 418 (Fla.1978); State v. Heisterman, 343 So.2d 1272 (Fla.1977); State v. Ray, 331 So.2d 316 (Fla.1976); Jenkins v. Wainwright, 322 So.2d 477 (Fla.1975); Estevez v. State, 313 So.2d 692 (Fl......
-
Hudgins v. Wainwright
...Florida Supreme Court found that two offenses were not part of the same transaction where they were temporally distinct. State v. Heisterman, 343 So.2d 1272 (Fla.1977). In that case, the court found that the act of assault with intent to commit murder was completed before the crime of shoot......
-
Johnson v. State
...sentences are proper where two or more convictions are obtained based on a single criminal episode. For example, in State v. Heisterman, 343 So.2d 1272 (Fla.1977), the respondent had been convicted both of assault with intent to commit murder and of shooting a gun into an occupied dwelling.......
-
Knight v. State, 78-2229
...in Brown v. State, supra, Knight could properly be adjudicated and sentenced for both. See Johnson v. State, supra; State v. Heisterman, 343 So.2d 1272 (Fla.1977); Fayerweather v. State, 332 So.2d 21 (Fla.1976); Jenkins v. Wainwright, 322 So.2d 477 (Fla.1975). The appellant's reliance for t......