Olivera v. State
92 So. 3d 924
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2012Background
- Olivera convicted of multiple offenses arising from an armed entry into a home to commit robbery.
- Convictions include attempted home invasion robbery with a firearm and armed burglary of a dwelling with a battery.
- Issue concerns double jeopardy for two offenses arising from the same episode.
- Court applies Blockburger/775.021(4) to assess whether offenses are separate.
- Court cites Davis, Coleman, Mendez, and Schulterbrandt as authorities on double jeopardy and subsumption.
- Court affirmes the greater offense (armed burglary) and vacates the lesser (attempted home invasion robbery) with remand for resentencing as needed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether double jeopardy bars convictions for attempted home invasion robbery and burglary. | Olivera argues the two convictions violate double jeopardy. | State argues convictions are permissible under Blockburger/§775.021(4). | Yes; convictions violate double jeopardy; vacate lesser offense and remand. |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. State, 74 So.3d 1096 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (double jeopardy when one offense subsumed by another)
- Coleman v. State, 956 So.2d 1254 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (subsumption doctrine under double jeopardy)
- Mendez v. State, 798 So.2d 749 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) (same-episode offenses and double jeopardy)
- Schulterbrandt v. State, 984 So.2d 542 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (attempted home invasion robbery and burglary conflict)