Legal Opinion

Bell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 4, 2013No. 5D12-1368PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Per curiam

Claude Bell appeals from his convictions and sentences, entered following guilty verdicts on three counts of aggravated assault with a firearm, two counts of robbery with a firearm and one count of attempted robbery with a firearm. The only argument on appeal is that the aggravated assault convictions violate double jeopardy because they are subsumed within the robbery convictions. Although all of the counts arose from a single criminal act— robbing three victims at gunpoint — the aggravated assault with a firearm counts do not violate double jeopardy because they contain different elements…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. State v. BakerSupreme Court of Florida · 1984
  2. Royal v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1986
  3. Wright v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1988
  4. Taylor v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1992
  5. McKinney v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2011

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Ramirez v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2013
  2. Delgado v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2015
  3. Washington v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2013
  4. Hankins v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2013
  5. JOHN AARON JACKSON v. THE STATE OF FLORIDADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2021

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API