Wilcher v. State, 87-430
| Decision Date | 10 May 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 87-430,87-430 |
| Citation | 524 So.2d 1105,13 Fla. L. Weekly 1116 |
| Parties | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1116 Earsley WILCHER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Robert Kalter, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Richard L. Kaplan, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before BARKDULL and DANIEL S. PEARSON and FERGUSON, JJ.
Under the rationale of Carawan v. State, 515 So.2d 161 (Fla.1987), discharging a firearm in public, section 790.15, Florida Statutes (1987), is the same offense as shooting a deadly missile into an occupied vehicle, section 790.19, Florida Statutes (1987). As in Carawan the two statutes were enacted to remedy the same evil. Because double jeopardy principles prohibit multiple punishment for the same offense, the conviction and sentence for the lesser offense must be vacated.
Wilcher contends that he is entitled to a new trial in any event because the prosecutor improperly told the jury that he had an obligation to call a known favorable witness. One of three arguments made by the State in response to Wilcher's contention is that any error was harmless.
The victim was the driver of a van which was also occupied by her male friend. As she drove by, Wilcher, who was parked in a school zone, called her an offensive name. At the urging of her male friend the victim stopped the van. The male companion got out of the van, and a verbal exchange between the two men ensued. The male friend returned to the van and the couple drove away. As they left, the victim saw the defendant point a shotgun in the direction of her vehicle. She then felt the impact of shotgun pellets which caused slight injury to the back of her head. Although he argues that the prosecutor's comment was not harmless, Wilcher is unable to present a theory from the undisputed facts which is reasonably consistent with innocence and inconsistent with guilt. In light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt we need not decide whether the comment was improper and, if so, whether the error was preserved for review.
Two other points are conceded by the State: (1) victim injury points cannot be added to the scoresheet if injury is not an element of the crime, Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(7); Camerron v. State, 508 So.2d 570 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), and (2) the written sentence does not conform to the sentence announced in court and should be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Donovan v. State
...(organized fraud). See, e.g., State v. Barton, 523 So.2d 152 (Fla.1988); Bell v. State, 437 So.2d 1057 (Fla.1983); Wilcher v. State, 524 So.2d 1105 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Young v. State, 506 So.2d 13, 15 (Fla. 5th DCA), cert. denied, 515 So.2d 231 (Fla.1987); Gordon v. State, 457 So.2d 1095 On......
-
Whitehead v. State, 94-1955
...Armstead v. State, 612 So.2d 623, 624 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Fairman v. State, 576 So.2d 948, 950 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Wilcher v. State, 524 So.2d 1105, 1106 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). In addition, the sentences imposed for counts five and seven, in the written sentencing order, were illegal since bo......
-
Valdes v. State
...Affirmed in part; remanded with instructions; conflict certified. 1. We specifically recognize our decision in Wilcher v. State, 524 So.2d 1105 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). Wilcher was decided prior to the amendment of section 775.021(4), and specifically relied upon Carawan. As previously noted in ......
-
Simon v. State, 92-128
...[either individually or collectively] contributed to the verdict. State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986); Wilcher v. State, 524 So.2d 1105 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). Third, the state concedes, and we agree, that it was unlawful for the trial court to impose consecutive mandatory minimum sent......