Bell v. State
122 So. 3d 958
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2013Background
- Bell, a convicted felon, was charged with one count of felon in possession of a firearm and one count of felon in possession of ammunition.
- A traffic stop led to the discovery of a loaded handgun in Bell’s glove compartment and six live rounds of ammunition in a speed loader carried by Bell.
- Bell pleaded no contest to both charges, and the trial court sentenced him to concurrent 24-month terms.
- The statute at issue prohibits possession of any firearm or ammunition by a felon under section 790.23(1), Florida Statutes (2011).
- The State’s theory treated firearm and ammunition as separate units of prosecution; Bell argues this violates double jeopardy.
- Florida courts have applied the a/any test (from Grappin and Watts) to determine whether the possession of multiple items can support multiple convictions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does 'any' in the statute create an ambiguous unit of prosecution? | Bell contends 'any' makes the unit ambiguous, precluding multiple convictions. | State argues 'any' allows separate units for each item, permitting multiple convictions. | Ambiguity; single conviction required for multiple items. |
| Should Bell’s firearm and ammunition convictions be merged under double jeopardy principles? | Bell asserts the dual convictions violate double jeopardy because one episode involved multiple prohibited items. | State argues separate convictions are allowed if statute describes distinct units of prosecution. | Convictions must be vacated; remand to vacate one conviction. |
Key Cases Cited
- Grappin v. State, 450 So.2d 480 (Fla. 1984) (held that 'a' firearm specified a unit of prosecution; ambiguity arises with 'any')
- State v. Watts, 462 So.2d 818 (Fla. 1985) (applied a/any test to determine unit of prosecution with 'any' language)
- Boyd v. State, 17 So.3d 812 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (applied a/any test to multiple items to determine double jeopardy impact)
- Strain v. State, 77 So.3d 796 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (followed Boyd on firearm and ammunition convictions)
- Hill v. State, 711 So.2d 1221 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (supports limitation when multiple items fall under 'any' language)
- Gisi v. State, 848 So.2d 1278 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (recognizes fundamental error admission timing for double jeopardy claims)