TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Pooley v. State

Pooley v. State, 403 So. 2d 593 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida · State Appellate Courts
Decided
September 14, 1981
Docket
No. YY-66
Judges
Shivers
Citations
403 So. 2d 593

Opinion

403 So.2d 593 (1981)

James A. POOLEY, Sr., Appellant,

v.

STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. YY-66.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

September 14, 1981.

*594 Carl S. McGinnes, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., David P. Gauldin, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

SHIVERS, Judge.

We affirm appellant's judgments of conviction for attempted robbery with a firearm and possession of a firearm by a convicted felony. However, we reverse appellant's life sentence for attempted robbery with a firearm.

On September 5, 1980, the trial court sentenced appellant to five years in prison for attempted robbery with a firearm and to a consecutive five year term for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, and committed him to the custody of the sheriff. Later that day, the trial court, on its own motion called appellant back before the court and announced that it had mistakenly thought that appellant was to have been sentenced for a third degree felony on the attempted robbery conviction at the previous sentencing. The court then stated it intended to resentence appellant to life in prison, explaining that attempted robbery with a firearm was a first degree felony and that life in prison was the maximum punishment for a first degree felony. However, because appellant's chief trial counsel was unavailable, the court set aside defendant's attempted robbery sentence and granted a motion for continuance until September 12, 1980. At the resentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced defendant to life in prison for attempted robbery with a firearm over objections that the new sentence was excessive and violated the double jeopardy prohibition.

Contrary to the trial court's interpretation, Section 812.13(2)(a) and Section 777.04(4)(b), Florida Statutes (1979), classifies attempted robbery with a firearm as a second degree felony for which the maximum punishment is fifteen years in prison. Section 775.082(3)(c), Florida Statutes (1979); Lee v. State, 400 So.2d 1238 (Fla. 1st DCA June 1, 1981); Arthur v. State, 391 So.2d 338 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980); Whidden v. State, 374 So.2d 543 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). The enhanced penalty statute, Section 775.087, Florida Statutes (1979), does not apply when the use of a firearm is an essential element of the offense. Crook v. State, 385 So.2d 1136, 1138 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). Consequently, appellant's current life sentence for attempted robbery with a firearm is illegal.

The trial court further erred in initially sentencing appellant to five years for attempted robbery with a firearm and then, after appellant began serving his sentence, setting aside the five year sentence and imposing a life sentence. Once a sentence has been imposed by the court and the defendant has begun serving that sentence, it is a violation of the defendant's constitutional guaranty against being twice placed into jeopardy for the court to resentence the defendant to an increased period of incarceration. Troupe v. Rowe, 283 So.2d 857 (Fla. 1973); Flowers v. State, 351 So.2d 387 *595 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); Andrews v. State, 357 So.2d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). The trial court was therefore without authority to set aside appellant's prior sentence and impose a new, increased sentence.

Accordingly, appellant's judgments of conviction and his five year sentence for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon are affirmed. Appellant's life sentence for attempted robbery with a firearm is vacated and the cause remanded to the trial court with directions to impose a sentence of five years with credit for 183 days jail time.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

McCORD, J., and WOODIE A. LILES (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

1983: 21986: 11993: 12003: 12017: 119832026peak 1983 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Rizzo v. State430 So. 2d 488 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)
  2. Perez v. State431 So. 2d 274 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)
  3. Commonwealth v. Hawkins490 N.E.2d 489 (Mass. App. Ct. 1986)
  4. Williams v. State850 So. 2d 656 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)
  5. Davon White v. State215 So. 3d 132 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)
  6. Chaney v. State617 So. 2d 844 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

Most recent

  1. Davon White v. State215 So. 3d 132 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)
  2. Williams v. State850 So. 2d 656 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)
  3. Chaney v. State617 So. 2d 844 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)
  4. Commonwealth v. Hawkins490 N.E.2d 489 (Mass. App. Ct. 1986)
  5. Perez v. State431 So. 2d 274 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)
  6. Rizzo v. State430 So. 2d 488 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 8

DepthCaseCited by
Troupe v. Rowe, 283 So. 2d 857 (Fla. 1973) 119
Flowers v. State, 351 So. 2d 387 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977) 24
Andrews v. State, 357 So. 2d 489 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978) 12
Whidden v. State, 374 So. 2d 543 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979) 9
Lee v. State, 400 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981) 8
Crook v. State, 385 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980) 7
Arthur v. State, 391 So. 2d 338 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980) 4
Floyd v. United States Sugar Corp., 403 So. 2d 593 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981) 1

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list