Legal Opinion

Ortiz-Medina v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 27, 2012No. 4D09-2084PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

On Motion for rehearing

2Per curiam

We grant the parties’ motions for rehearing, withdraw our previously issued opinion, and substitute the following in its place.

Appellant appeals his convictions and sentences for armed kidnapping and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, claiming that they violate double jeopardy. We agree and reverse his conviction and sentence for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

A defendant’s double jeopardy rights are violated when he is convicted of two “[ojffenses which require identical elements of proof.” § 775.021(4)(b)l., Fla. Stat. In James v. State, 386 So.2d 890,…

3Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Capehart v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1991
  2. James v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980

4Cited by4 opinions

  1. JORDAN PALMER v. STATE OF FLORIDADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2018
  2. MARCUS JAMES v. STATE OF FLORIDADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2019
  3. Harris v. Secretary, Department of Corrections (Flagler County)District Court, M.D. Florida · 2020
  4. Solomon v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API