Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

CLIFF PARNELL, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of three counts of grand theft, in violation of section 812.014, Florida Statutes, and three counts of dealing in stolen property, in violation of section 812.019(1), Florida Statutes, relating to the same three vehicles. He was also convicted of one count of operating a "chop shop," in violation of section 812.16, Florida Statutes. We reject appellant's arguments relating to the sufficiency of evidence to support his convictions; however, we agree that, under the circumstances of this case, under section 812.025, Florida Statutes, he cannot be convicted of both grand theft and dealing in stolen property as to the three vehicles. See Gray v. State, 611 So.2d 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Rhames v. State, 473 So.2d 724 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (given statute's prohibitory language, not precluded from raising this issue on appeal even though no objection to erroneous instructions). We therefore vacate appellant's convictions for grand theft in counts I through III, and remand for correction of sentence to reflect that the grand theft convictions have been vacated, see Schummer v. State, 657 So.2d 3 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). In all other respects, we affirm the convictions and sentences.

BOOTH, JOANOS and BENTON, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PARNELL v. STATE
(Oct 10, 1995)