5D04-2767 Celeste Fox v. State

State: Florida

Court: Florida Fifth District Court

Docket No: 5D04-2767

Case Date: 01/31/2005

Preview:IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM 2005

CELESTE MAY FOX, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. ________________________________/ Opinion filed February 4, 2005 Appeal from the Circuit Court for St. Johns County, Robert K. Mathis, Judge. James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Kevin R. Holtz, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. Celeste May Fox, Ocala, pro se. No Appearance for Appellee. GRIFFIN, J. Defense counsel has dropped a footnote in its Anders1 brief to say that Celeste May Fox's ["Fox"] sentences for grand theft and dealing in stolen property violate double jeopardy because they arose from the same course of conduct, citing Hall v. State , 826 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 2002). In Barfield v . State, 871 So. 2d 929 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004), however, we observed: In the instant case, it is the lack of record evidence that [Defendant's] convictions for dealing in stolen property and Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); In re: Anders Briefs, 581 So. 2d 149 (Fla. 1991).
1

Case No. 5D04-2767

grand theft arose from the same scheme or course of conduct that creates the true impediment to [Defendant's] argument on appeal. Id. at 931. This case, like Barfield, involves a plea and the circumstances of the

offences are not clear from the record. More important, unlike Barfield and Hall, Fox entered into a detailed plea agreement with the State that included both convictions. See Barfield, 871 So. 2d 930. Hall v. State , 767 So. 2d 560, 561 (Fla. 4 th DCA 2000). AFFIRMED. THOMPSON and TORPY, JJ., concur.

2

Download 5D04-2767 Celeste Fox v. State.pdf