midpage

Stripling v. StateStripling v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida
Nov 23, 1994
No. 94-2153
Versions:645 So. 2d 589
1994 WL 656611
1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 11342
PER CURIAM.

The order denying appellant’s motion for postconviction relief is affirmed. As to the second issue, defendant was properly convicted of armed robbery under section 812.13(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1989). The State need only show that defendant’s participation in the crime satisfied section 777.011, Florida Statutes (1989). The State need not show that defendant personally possessed the firearm. See id.; State v. McQuay, 403 So.2d 566, 568 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Norris v. State, 360 So.2d 476 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).*

Affirmed.

Notes

A different rule applies where section 775.087, Florida Statutes, is used to enhance the felony or impose a three-year mandatory minimum sentence. See State v. Rodriguez, 602 So.2d 1270, 1271-72 (Fla. 1992); Earnest v. State, 351 So.2d 957, 958-59 (Fla. 1977); Stripling v. State, 602 So.2d 663, 665 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992).

Case Details

Case Name: Stripling v. State
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Nov 23, 1994
Citations: 645 So. 2d 589; 1994 WL 656611; 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 11342; No. 94-2153
Docket Number: No. 94-2153
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
Log In