Taylor v. State, 401 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). · Go Syfert
Search
Taylor v. State, 401 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Grene v. State (fladistctapp, 1997-09-03)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Grene v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1997 · confidence medium
We simply hold that a plea of guilty to a charge does not waive a claim that—judged on its face—the charge is one which the State may not constitutionally prosecute.'" Id. at 575 , 109 S.Ct. at 765 (citation omitted). [3] Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 304 , 52 S.Ct. 180, 182 , 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932). [4] We recede also from Mingo v. State, 680 So.2d 1079, 1080 (Fla.3d DCA 1996); Marion v. State, 674 So.2d 878, 879 (Fla.3d DCA 1996); Hines v. State, 401 So.2d 878 (Fla.3d DCA 1981); Taylor v. State, 401 So.2d 877, 878 (Fla.3d DCA 1981); Keefer v. State, 397 So.2d 1181 (Fla.3d DCA 19…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Guardado v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1990 · confidence medium
Anderson v. State, 392 So.2d 328 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); see Hines v. State, 401 So.2d 878 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Taylor v. State, 401 So.2d 877, 878 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Davis v. State, 392 So.2d 947 , 949 n. 2 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); see also Peel v. State, 150 So.2d 281, 297 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963), appeal dismissed, 168 So.2d 147 (Fla. 1964), cert. denied, 380 U.S. 986 , 85 S.Ct. 1359 , 14 L.Ed.2d 279 (1965).
discussed Cited "see" Irizarry v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1991 · signal: see · confidence high
Guardado v. State, 562 So.2d 696 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); see Taylor v. State, 401 So.2d 877, 878 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Hines v. State, 401 So.2d 878 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Anderson v. State, 392 So.2d 328 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Davis v. State, 392 So.2d 947 , 949 n. 2 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).
Glenn TAYLOR, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
79-2289.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Jul 21, 1981.
401 So. 2d 877
Hendry, Schwartz and Daniel S. Pearson.
Cited by 5 opinions  |  Published

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Ronald S. Lieberman, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Theda R. James, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Joseph Corey, Legal Intern, for appellee.

Before HENDRY, SCHWARTZ and DANIEL S. PEARSON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

No motion for mistrial having been made to the opening argument comment of the prosecutor, which Taylor now contends was objectionable, the suggested error of the comment was not properly preserved for our review. State v. Cumbie, 380 So.2d 1031 (Fla. 1980); Clark v. State, 363 So.2d 331 (Fla. 1978). We have reviewed Taylor's other point on appeal and find it to be without merit.

[*878] Although Taylor did not challenge on appeal the fact that he was sentenced, albeit concurrently, for both the crimes of robbery during the course of which defendant carried a firearm (Count One) and possession and display of that firearm during the commission of that robbery (Count Two), we reverse the sentence imposed on Count Two. Davis v. State, 392 So.2d 947 (Fla.3d DCA 1981). See Gonzalez v. State, 392 So.2d 334 (Fla.3d DCA 1981).

Taylor's failure to raise any objection before or after the entry of the judgment adjudicating him guilty of both counts waives any claim of double jeopardy and precludes us from setting aside the conviction on Count Two. Williams v. State, 397 So.2d 438 (Fla.3d DCA 1981). See Davis v. State, supra, at 949 n. 2.

The convictions are affirmed; the sentence imposed on Count Two is vacated.