From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
May 9, 1996
673 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 1996)

Opinion

No. 86476.

May 9, 1996.

Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal, Direct Conflict of Decisions, Fourth District, Case No. 94-2798, St. Lucie County.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender and Anthony Calvello, Assistant Public Defender, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, West Palm Beach, for Petitioner.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General and Michael J. Neimand, Assistant Attorney General, Miami, for Respondent.


We have for review Williams v. State, 658 So.2d 665 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), in which the district court addressed the same question we recently answered in State v. Johnson, 21 Fla.L.Weekly S154, ___ So.2d ___ [1996 WL 154126] (Fla. April 4, 1996). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3 (b)(3), Fla. Const.

In Johnson, we held that aggravated stalking and the defendant's violation of an injunction were two separate offenses, and double jeopardy did not bar a subsequent prosecution. In accordance with our decision in Johnson, we approve the decision of the district court in the instant case.

It is so ordered.

GRIMES, C.J., and OVERTON, KOGAN, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Williams v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
May 9, 1996
673 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 1996)
Case details for

Williams v. State

Case Details

Full title:ROGER LEE WILLIAMS, PETITIONER, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT

Court:Supreme Court of Florida

Date published: May 9, 1996

Citations

673 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 1996)

Citing Cases

State v. Gagne

In Johnson, our supreme court held that double jeopardy does not bar a subsequent prosecution for aggravated…