Wimberly v. State, 649 So. 2d 338 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). · Go Syfert
Search
Wimberly v. State, 649 So. 2d 338 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
3 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: RYAN DENARD LEE v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA (fladistctapp, 2021-07-07)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) RYAN DENARD LEE v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2021 · confidence medium
Wimberly v. State, 649 So. 2d 338, 338 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); Gantorius v. State, 761 So. 2d 488, 490 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); see also Cleveland v. State, 587 So. 2d 1145, 1146 (Fla. 1991); Marmol v. State, 750 So.2d 764, 766 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Acosta v. State, 738 So. 2d 487, 488 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); Vidal v. State, 704 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Sales v. State, 653 So. 2d 456 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Rodrick WIMBERLY
v.
The STATE of Florida
No. 94-1477.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Feb 1, 1995.
649 So. 2d 338
1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 608
1995 WL 36165
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Robert Kalter, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant., Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Roberta G. Mandel, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Barkdull, Goderich, Schwartz.
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

The defendant, Rodrick Wimberly, appeals from his convictions and sentences for second degree murder with a firearm and for unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense.

We affirm the conviction and sentence for second degree murder; however, upon the State’s proper confession of error, we reverse the conviction and sentence for unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense. Where the use of a weapon is the basis for enhancing the charge of second degree murder to a life felony, double jeopardy bars a separate conviction and sentence for misuse of the same firearm. Cleveland v. State, 587 So.2d 1145 (Fla.1991); Allen v. State, 643 So.2d 87 (Fla.3d DCA 1994); Joseph v. State, 625 So.2d 109 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Thomas v. State, 617 So.2d 1128 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993).

We find that the defendant’s remaining point lacks merit.

Accordingly, we affirm in part and reverse in part.