Bell v. State, 114 So. 3d 229

Bell and a co-defendant robbed three victims at gunpoint, taking property from two victims.
Bell was convicted of three counts of aggravated assault with a firearm, two counts of robbery with a firearm, and one count of attempted robbery with a firearm.
Counts for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and possession of ammunition by a convicted felon were severed and later nolle prossed.
Bell appeals arguing the aggravated assault convictions are subsumed within the robbery convictions in violation of double jeopardy.
The underlying acts arose from a single criminal act of robbing three victims at gunpoint, but the court analyzes whether the statutory elements permit separate convictions.
The court ultimately affirms, concluding the aggravated assault counts require proof of elements not contained in the robbery/attempted robbery counts.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Do aggravated assault with a firearm convictions violate double jeopardy when tied to robbery with a firearm?	Bell argues the aggravated assaults are subsumed by robbery with a firearm.	State contends separate convictions are permitted by distinct statutory elements.	No double jeopardy violation; convictions upheld.
Whether the governing rule is that aggravated assault is a lesser included offense of armed robbery or not under current precedent?	Bell relies on a dissent suggesting indisputability of separate offenses.	State argues White and Taylor limit reliance on dissent and uphold separate convictions.	Aggravated assault is not a category-one lesser included offense; separate convictions permitted.

State v. Baker, 452 So.2d 927 (Fla.1984) (armed robbery and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon may yield separate convictions)
Royal v. State, 490 So.2d 44 (Fla.1986) (robbery with a firearm not sustainable when aggravated assault is the lesser included offense)
Taylor v. State, 608 So.2d 804 (Fla.1992) (aggravated assault is not a category-one lesser included offense of armed robbery)
Ward v. State, 898 So.2d 1152 (Fla.5th DCA 2005) (districts rely on Taylor; separate convictions upheld)
Delaney v. State, 673 So.2d 541 (Fla.3d DCA 1996) (separate convictions for robbery with a firearm and aggravated assault)
Owens v. State, 626 So.2d 240 (Fla.2d DCA 1993) (recognizes separate punishments where statutory elements permit)
White v. State, 753 So.2d 668 (Fla.1st DCA 2000) (principle comparing elements, not acts, in double jeopardy analysis)
Akins v. State, 462 So.2d 1161 (Fla.5th DCA 1984) (dissent discussed; not controlling rule for majority decision)
McKinney v. State, 66 So.3d 852 (Fla.2011) (fundamental-error review of double jeopardy where undisputed facts)
Bailey v. State, 21 So.3d 147 (Fla.5th DCA 2009) (double jeopardy can be raised for the first time on appeal as fundamental error)