Walsh v. State, 579 So. 2d 908 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991). · Go Syfert
Search
Walsh v. State, 579 So. 2d 908 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“t is readily apparent that a defendant's abrupt departure from the courthouse after jury selection indicates a desire to avoid prosecution”
9 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: State v. Kelly (conn, 2001-05-08)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) State v. Kelly
Conn. · 2001 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
t is readily apparent that a defendant's abrupt departure from the courthouse after jury selection indicates a desire to avoid prosecution
cited Cited "see" Walsh v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1992 · signal: see · confidence high
See Walsh v. State, 579 So.2d 908 (Fla.5th DCA 1991). . 164 points for primary offense at conviction, 13 points for additional offenses at conviction and 116 points for prior record.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Decker v. State
Md. · 2009 · signal: see also · confidence medium
The court reasoned that, like flight from the crime scene, “evidence of flight that occurs in close temporal proximity to other significant events in the course of a prosecution (such as the commencement of trial) also may be probative of the defendant’s guilt.” Id. at 973; see also Harold v. State, 579 So.2d 908, 909 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1991) (upholding admission of defendant’s failure to appear for a previous trial date in the case); Scott v. State, 216 Ga.App. 692 , 455 S.E.2d 609 , 611 *645 (1995) (holding that the trial court properly admitted as evidence two bench warrants issued fo…
cited Cited "see, e.g." Perry v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2001 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Harold v. State, 579 So.2d 908 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991).
George WALSH
v.
STATE of Florida
No. 90-853.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
May 30, 1991.
579 So. 2d 908
Richard S. Rhodes, Orlando, for appellant., Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee and Rebecca R. Wall, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.
Diamantis, Goshorn, Griffin.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
GOSHORN, Judge.

George William Walsh appeals his convictions for trafficking in cocaine,[1] conspiracy to traffic,[2] and sale of a controlled substance [3] as well as his sentence as an habitual offender.[4] We affirm the convictions, but reverse and remand the sentence because the defendant’s habitual offender status was predicated on three prior felony convictions occurring on the same date.

Because the defendant committed the offenses for which he is being sentenced on July 7 and July 11, 1989, the 1988 version of the habitual offender statute governs. This court has previously held that section 775.084(l)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp.1988)[5] requires sequential or successive convictions, in the sense that the first conviction must have occurred prior to the commission of the second offense. Taylor v. State, 558 So.2d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). A like result was reached by our sister courts in Barnes v. State, 576 So.2d 758 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) and Walker v. State, 567 So.2d 546 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990).

Convictions AFFIRMED; Sentence REVERSED and REMANDED for resentenc-ing.

GRIFFIN and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur.
1

§ 893.135(l)(b)l, Fla.Stat. (1989).

2

§§ 893.135(l)(b)l and 893.135(4), Fla.Stat. (1989).

3

§ 893.13(l)(a)l, Fla.Stat. (1989).

4

§ 775.084, Fla.Stat. (1989).

5

Section 775.084(l)(a) states in pertinent part:

(a) "Habitual felony offender" means a defendant for whom the court may impose an extended term of imprisonment, as provided in this section, if it finds that:
1. The defendant has previously been convicted of two or more felonies in this state;
[[Image here]]