Home
Menu
Call attorney Graham Syfert at 904-383-7448
Personal Injury Lawyer
Florida Statute 775.021 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
F.S. 775.021 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:
Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 775.021

The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XLVI
CRIMES
Chapter 775
GENERAL PENALTIES; REGISTRATION OF CRIMINALS
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 775.021
775.021 Rules of construction.
(1) The provisions of this code and offenses defined by other statutes shall be strictly construed; when the language is susceptible of differing constructions, it shall be construed most favorably to the accused.
(2) The provisions of this chapter are applicable to offenses defined by other statutes, unless the code otherwise provides.
(3) This section does not affect the power of a court to punish for contempt or to employ any sanction authorized by law for the enforcement of an order or a civil judgment or decree.
(4)(a) Whoever, in the course of one criminal transaction or episode, commits an act or acts which constitute one or more separate criminal offenses, upon conviction and adjudication of guilt, shall be sentenced separately for each criminal offense; and the sentencing judge may order the sentences to be served concurrently or consecutively. For the purposes of this subsection, offenses are separate if each offense requires proof of an element that the other does not, without regard to the accusatory pleading or the proof adduced at trial.
(b) The intent of the Legislature is to convict and sentence for each criminal offense committed in the course of one criminal episode or transaction and not to allow the principle of lenity as set forth in subsection (1) to determine legislative intent. Exceptions to this rule of construction are:
1. Offenses which require identical elements of proof.
2. Offenses which are degrees of the same offense as provided by statute.
3. Offenses which are lesser offenses the statutory elements of which are subsumed by the greater offense.
(5) Whoever commits an act that violates a provision of this code or commits a criminal offense defined by another statute and thereby causes the death of, or bodily injury to, an unborn child commits a separate offense if the provision or statute does not otherwise specifically provide a separate offense for such death or injury to an unborn child.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the punishment for a separate offense under this subsection is the same as the punishment provided under this code or other statute for that conduct had the injury or death occurred to the mother of the unborn child.
(b) An offense under this subsection does not require proof that the person engaging in the conduct:
1. Had knowledge or should have had knowledge that the victim of the underlying offense was pregnant; or
2. Intended to cause the death of, or bodily injury to, the unborn child.
(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the death penalty may not be imposed for an offense under this subsection.
(d) This subsection does not permit the prosecution:
1. Of any person for conduct relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman, or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf, has been obtained or for which such consent is implied by law;
2. Of a person for providing medical treatment of the pregnant woman or her unborn child; or
3. Of a woman with respect to her unborn child.
(e) As used in this subsection, the term “unborn child” means a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.
History.s. 3, ch. 74-383; s. 1, ch. 76-66; s. 1, ch. 77-174; s. 1, ch. 83-156; s. 7, ch. 88-131; s. 2, ch. 2014-194.

F.S. 775.021 on Google Scholar

F.S. 775.021 on Casetext

Amendments to 775.021


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 775.021
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

S775.021 5a - BATTERY - CAUSE BOD INJ UNBRN CHLD SEE TBLE OTH FORM BAT - F: S
S775.021 5a - HOMICIDE - CAUSE DEATH UNBRN CHILD SEE TBLE OTH FORM MURD - F: F



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

WEITZ, DOC v. STATE, 275 So. 3d 707 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932), or whether multiple punishments are otherwise precluded under section 775.021 . . . Accordingly, we look to Blockburger, as codified at section 775.021(4), which provides: (a) Whoever, . . . State, 185 So. 3d 1207, 1210 (Fla. 2016) ("[T]he plain language of section 775.021(4)(a) ... requires . . . State, 780 So. 2d 17 (Fla. 2001), regarding how to analyze the exception in section 775.021(4)(b)(2). . . . Valdes does not address the exception in section 775.021(4)(b)(3), so the analysis of that exception . . .

WANLESS, v. STATE, 271 So. 3d 1219 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Stat. (1999) (emphasis added) (subsection (d) remains unaltered today); see also § 775.021(4)(a) & (b . . .

MESEN, a k a v. STATE, 271 So. 3d 164 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . See § 775.021(1), Fla. Stat. (2013). . . .

L. TAYLOR, v. STATE, 267 So. 3d 1088 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . language of the relevant statutes is clear, we do not resort to an analysis of the factors in section 775.021 . . . offenses can result from a single criminal transaction, then resort to the analysis outlined in section 775.021 . . . State , 515 So.2d 161, 167 (Fla. 1987) ("[T]he only purpose of section 775.021(4) is as an aid in determining . . .

BUGGS, a k a v. STATE, 268 So. 3d 878 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . However, section 775.021(4), which was amended in 1988 by adding subsection (4)(b), see ch. 88-131, § . . . Offenses which are lesser offenses the statutory elements of which are subsumed by the greater offense. § 775.021 . . . The cases relied upon by the trial court predate the 1988 amendment to section 775.021(4) and have no . . . Pursuant to section 775.021(4) and McCloud and its progeny, Buggs was properly sentenced separately for . . .

EDWARDS, v. STATE, 268 So. 3d 849 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . To determine legislative intent in this case, both parties rely on section 775.021(4)(a), Florida Statutes . . .

GONZALEZ, v. STATE, 271 So. 3d 80 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . ."); § 775.021(4), Fla. . . .

SHADE, v. STATE, 263 So. 3d 91 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . The State acknowledges Hawkins , but argues that dual burglary convictions are authorized by section 775.021 . . . Offenses which are lesser offenses the statutory elements of which are subsumed by the greater offense. § 775.021 . . . More specifically, the State argues that none of the exceptions in section 775.021(4)(b) apply to this . . . Thus, sections 775.021(4)(b) 2. and 3. apply to this case. . . .

BARBER, v. STATE, 263 So. 3d 1133 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . simple battery because the offenses include different elements and none of the exceptions in section 775.021 . . . offenses which are lesser offenses, the statutory elements of which are subsumed by the greater offense. § 775.021 . . .

IN RE STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES- REPORT, 262 So. 3d 59 (Fla. 2019)

. . . . § 775.021(5), Fla. Stat. . . . Give if applicable. § 775.021(5)(b), Fla. Stat. . . . See § 775.021(5), Fla. Stat. 1. a. (Victim) is dead. b. . . .

STATE v. ESTIME,, 259 So. 3d 884 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . See § 775.021(1), Fla. Stat. (2006). . . .

LEE, v. STATE, 258 So. 3d 1297 (Fla. 2018)

. . . prohibit separate punishments," courts employ the Blockburger same-elements test, codified in section 775.021 . . .

SIMS, v. STATE, 260 So. 3d 509 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . whether the Legislature authorized separate punishments for robbery and theft, it looked to section 775.021 . . . sentence for each criminal offense committed in the course of one criminal episode or transaction." § 775.021 . . . Id. § 775.021(4)(b) 3. . . .

HUCKABA, v. STATE, 260 So. 3d 377 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . ." § 775.021(5)(e), Fla. Stat. (2014). . . .

WILLIAMS, v. STATE, 257 So. 3d 1218 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . State , 110 So.3d 55, 58 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) ("[U]nder section 775.021(4)(b)(2), an attempt to commit . . .

R. N. a v. STATE, 257 So. 3d 507 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . defining malice in section 843.19(4) as actual malice, is consistent with the Rule of Lenity and section 775.021 . . . Section 775.021(1) states that "[t]he provisions of this code and offenses defined by other statutes . . .

SHEPARD, v. STATE, 259 So. 3d 701 (Fla. 2018)

. . . ." § 775.021(1), Fla. . . .

WIGGINS, v. STATE, 253 So. 3d 1196 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . The rule of lenity, codified in section 775.021, Florida Statutes, requires that penal statutes be strictly . . .

TAMBRIZ- RAMIREZ, v. STATE, 248 So. 3d 1087 (Fla. 2018)

. . . ." § 775.021(4)(a) Fla. Stat. (2009) (emphasis [added] ). . . . United States , 284 U.S. 299, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932), which is codified at section 775.021 . . . When a proper double jeopardy analysis is conducted in accordance with section 775.021(4)(b) and our . . . In Valdes , we held that section 775.021(4)(b) 2. . . . We reject that argument, because it directly contravenes the plain language of section 775.021(4)(b) . . . As I have previously stated, " section 775.021(4), Florida Statutes -which requires a double jeopardy . . .

EUSTACHE, v. STATE, 248 So. 3d 1097 (Fla. 2018)

. . . See § 775.021(1), Fla. Stat. (2017) ; see also Crews v. State , 183 So.3d 329, 333 (Fla. 2015). . . . two different, reasonable interpretations of the statute, the rule of lenity, as expressed in section 775.021 . . . Crews , 183 So.3d at 333 (quoting § 775.021(1), Fla. Stat. (2014) ). . . .

IN RE STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES- REPORT, 249 So. 3d 554 (Fla. 2018)

. . . sections 1 and 3, and chapter 2017-107, sections 1-2, Laws of Florida, amending sections 943.0435 and 775.021 . . .

ARMAS, v. STATE, 250 So. 3d 817 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . The Florida Legislature did so when it enacted section 775.021(4)(a), Florida Statutes (2015), which . . . Id. § 775.021(4)(b). . . . Similarly, whether section 775.021(4)(a) precludes dual convictions and sentences on undisputed facts . . . Section 775.021(4)(a) is a codification of the "same elements" test enunciated in Blockburger v. . . . This exception under section 775.021(4)(b) 2. prohibits a defendant from being punished for violating . . .

STATE v. KWITOWSKI, Jr., 250 So. 3d 210 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . See § 775.021(1), Fla. Stat. (2016) ; Paul v. State, 129 So.3d 1058, 1064 (Fla. 2013). . . .

B. PALMER, v. STATE, 254 So. 3d 426 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . State , 126 So.3d 1183, 1183 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (quoting § 775.021(4)(b)(1), Fla. Stat. (2016) ). . . .

PARISH, v. STATE, 249 So. 3d 734 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . State, 364 So.2d 497, 500 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978) (citing § 775.021(4), Fla. . . . (citing § 775.021(4), Fla. Stat. (1979) ). Hegstrom was subsequently overruled by State v. . . .

GRAVES, v. STATE, 248 So. 3d 1238 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . interpretations, we would apply, as a canon of last resort, the rule of lenity provided in section 775.021 . . .

VANSMITH, v. STATE, 247 So. 3d 64 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . petitioner argues that the trial court departed from the essential elements of law by using section 775.021 . . . years based on the court's ability to structure sentences consecutively in accordance with section 775.021 . . . (4) for seven years, see section 775.021(4), Florida Statutes (1976), and singular versions of words . . . The petitioner urges us to apply the rule of lenity, which is codified in section 775.021(1). . . . Based on the foregoing, we find that the Legislature intended section 775.021(4)(a) to be applied when . . .

MELVIN, v. STATE, 246 So. 3d 424 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . If a criminal statute is ambiguous, we would normally apply the rule of lenity in section 775.021(1), . . .

WILLIAMS, III, v. STATE, 244 So. 3d 356 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Weeks , 202 So.3d 1, 10 (Fla. 2016) (citing section 775.021(1), Florida Statutes ). . . .

ANGUILLE, v. STATE, 243 So. 3d 410 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . . § 775.021(4)(b), Fla. Stat. Pizzo v. State , 945 So.2d 1203, 1206 (Fla. 2006). . . . Specifically, section 775.021, "Rules of construction," provides in relevant part: (4)(a) Whoever, in . . . Offenses which are lesser offenses the statutory elements of which are subsumed by the greater offense. § 775.021 . . . Section 775.021(4) expressly states an inherent desire to punish under separate statutory schemes unless . . . In looking at the statutory construction in line with section 775.021(4), to allow convictions for both . . .

DOYLE, v. STATE, 240 So. 3d 95 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Double jeopardy is governed by section 775.021, Florida Statutes, which codified the Blockburger "same . . . that the other does not, without regard to the accusatory pleading or the proof adduced at trial. § 775.021 . . . "Under the basic rule of Blockburger and section 775.021(4)(a), if 'each offense requires proof of an . . . See § 775.021(4)(a), Fla. Stat. . . .

OAKLEY, v. STATE, 237 So. 3d 396 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . The Blockburger test is codified in section 775.021, Florida Statutes (2012), to determine whether separate . . .

AGUILAR, v. STATE, 239 So. 3d 108 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . (double jeopardy clause); § 775.021(4)(b)(3), Fla. . . .

RODRIGUEZ, v. STATE, 231 So. 3d 584 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . . § 775.021(1), Fla. . . .

MCCULLOUGH, v. STATE, 230 So. 3d 586 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . only violate the single homicide rule but also violate the Blockburger test as codified in section 775.021 . . . I write to discuss the proper application of the Blockburger test as set forth in section 775.021(4). . . . State, No. 2D16-469, 227 So.3d 1254, 2017 WL 4272109 (Fla. 2d DCA Sept. 27, 2017) (citing § 775.021(4 . . . See § 775.021(4). . . . Because these two offenses do not pass the Blockburger test as codified in section 775.021(4), it is . . . The legislature has codified the double jeopardy bar within section 775.021(4)(a)-(b), Florida Statutes . . . Section 775.021(4)(a)-(b) is, at its core, a recitation of the well-known Blockburger test. . . . The plain and ordinary language of section 775.021(4) unambiguously states that it is the legislature . . . Accordingly; these two offenses satisfy the statutory Blockburger test set forth in section 775.021(4 . . . No part of section 775.021 instructs courts to utilize the single homicide rule as though it were the . . .

WYCHE, v. STATE, 232 So. 3d 1117 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Stat. (2014); § 775.021(5)(e), Fla. Stat. (2014). . . . Also effective October 2014, a new rule of construction was added to -section 775.021, Florida Statutes . . . Stat. (2014); § 775.021(5)(e), Fla. Stat. (2014). . . .

WEITZ, v. STATE, 229 So. 3d 872 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . United States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932); see also § 775.021(4)(a), Fla. . . .

FLEMING, v. STATE, 227 So. 3d 1254 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Under section 775.021(4)(a), Florida Statutes (2014), “[wjhoever, in the course of one criminal transaction . . . offense, we first consider whether the convictions arose from the same criminal transaction or episode. § 775.021 . . . predicated on distinct acts.’ ” Lee, 223 So.3d at 348 (quoting Partch, 43 So.3d at 760); see also § 775.021 . . . See § 775.021(4)(a). . . . .” § 775.021(4)(a). . . .

LEE, v. STATE, 223 So. 3d 342 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . does not address: neither the protection against double jeopardy, nor the requirements of section ¡ 775.021 . . . defendant claiming a multiple-punishment violation under either the Double Jeopardy Clause or section 775.021 . . . for the double-jeopardy violation is not available until multiple convictions are imposed. .Section 775.021 . . . States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932),] ‘same-elements’ test pursuant to section 775.021 . . . Moreover, section 775.021(4) speaks in terms of "conviction,” "adjudication of guilt,” and "sentence. . . . The “Blockburger test” is codified in Florida in section 775.021(4), Florida Statutes, which provides . . . Offenses which are lesser offenses the statutory elements of which are subsumed by the greater offense. § 775.021 . . . Florida Supreme Court held, that Shelley’s dual conviction violated the Blockburger test in section 775.021 . . . See § 775.021(4). . . . See § 775.021(4)(a), Fla. Stat. In Capron v. . . . after solicitation, the offenses are the same” for purposes of the double jeopardy test in section 775.021 . . .

DETTLE, s v. STATE s, 226 So. 3d 285 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . convictions and punishments are for “the same offense” or separate offenses is codified in section 775.021 . . . Offenses which are lesser offenses the statutory elements of which are subsumed by the greater offense. § 775.021 . . . soliciting a minor) “the same for purposes of the Blockburger same-elements test codified in section 775.021 . . .

MERCER, v. STATE, 219 So. 3d 936 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . based on distinct acts, whether the two convictions “survive a same elements test as (Mined by section 775.021 . . .

MARSH, v. STATE, 219 So. 3d 214 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . convictions arose from the same acts and because felony battery “wholly subsumes battery”); see also § 775.021 . . .

GOMEZ, v. STATE, 220 So. 3d 495 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . authorize separate punishments for two crimes, courts employ the Block-burger test, as codified in section 775.021 . . . Section 775.021(4), Florida Statutes (2016), provides as follows: (4)(a) Whoever, in the course of one . . . offenses when faced with a double jeopardy violation, this Court has stated that based upon section 775.021 . . . Further, section 775.021(4)(b)(3) itself states that lesser offenses are “the statutory elements . of . . . adjudication of the defendant as guilty for both offenses would violate double jeopardy and section 775.021 . . .

GONZALEZ, v. SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,, 689 F. App'x 917 (11th Cir. 2017)

. . . . § 775.021(4)(a). . . .

MCNEIL, v. STATE, 215 So. 3d 55 (Fla. 2017)

. . . See § 775.021(1), Fla. . . .

G. DEBAUN, v. STATE, 213 So. 3d 747 (Fla. 2017)

. . . Finally, we reject the suggestion that the rule of lenity in section 775.021(1), Florida Statutes, requires . . .

TAMBRIZ- RAMIREZ, v. STATE, 213 So. 3d 920 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . . § 775.021(4), Fla. Stat. (2009) (emphasis supplied). . . . “Where even a single act constitutes multiple separate criminal offenses, as defined in section 775.021 . . . offender must be sentenced separately for each offense unless one of the three exceptions in section 775.021 . . . The subsumed-within exception of section 775.021(4)(b)3, applies “only if the greater offense necessarily . . . We have recognized that, under the section 775.021(4)(b)3 exception, a simple assault or a simple battery . . .

IN RE STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES- REPORT NO., 211 So. 3d 995 (Fla. 2017)

. . . . § 775.021(5), Fla. Stat. . . . Give if applicable. § 775.021(5)(b), Fla. Stat. . . . Stat. § 775.021(5), Fla. Stat. . . . Give if applicable. § 775.021(5) (b), Fla. Stat. . . .

T. PATTERSON, v. STATE, 206 So.3d 64 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . State, 957 So.2d 625, 630 (Fla. 2007)); see § 775.021(4) (providing that a sentencing judge may order . . .

SOLOMON, III, v. STATE, 206 So.3d 822 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . . § 775.021(4)(a) (“Whoever, in the course of one criminal transaction or episode, commits an act or . . . United States, 220 U.S. 338, 342, 31 S.Ct. 421, 55 L.Ed. 489 (1911)); see also § 775.021(4)(a) (“[0]f-fenses . . . Ortiz-Medina relied solely on James which interpreted the 1977 version of section 775.021(4). . . .

WALTON, v. STATE, 208 So. 3d 60 (Fla. 2016)

. . . Section 775.021(4)(a) unequivocally provides: Whoever, in the course of one criminal transaction or episode . . . offense; and the sentencing judge may order the sentences to be served concurrently or consecutively. § 775.021 . . . We concluded that notwithstanding subsection 775.021(4), Florida Statutes (1981), which — like the current . . . legislature intended such a result as the sentence under review here when it added subsection (4) to section 775.021 . . . imposed on the unfettered discretion to impose consecutive sentences that is expressly granted by section 775.021 . . .

McCLOUD, v. STATE, 208 So. 3d 668 (Fla. 2016)

. . . United States, 284 U.S. 299, 304, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932); § 775.021(4), Fla. . . .

WHITFIELD, v. STATE, 202 So. 3d 456 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . This Court reasoned that both pairs of convictions ran afoul of section 775.021(4)(b)2., Florida Statutes . . .

HUGHES, v. STATE, 201 So. 3d 1230 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . solicitation, the offenses are the same for purposes of the Blockburger same-elements test codified in section 775.021 . . .

STATE v. WEEKS,, 202 So. 3d 1 (Fla. 2016)

. . . Under the rule of lenity codified in section 775.021(1), this definition must “be strictly construed. . . . is susceptible of differing constructions,” it must “be construed most favorably to the accused.” § 775.021 . . . State, 973 So.2d 1107, 1111 (Fla.2007) (quoting § 775.021(1), Fla. Stat. (2002)). . . . This extremely important statutory canon is codified in section 775.021(1), Florida Statutes (2012), . . . is susceptible of differing constructions, it shall be construed most favorably to the accused.” § 775.021 . . .

GRAHAM, v. STATE, 207 So.3d 135 (Fla. 2016)

. . . Here, the Court set forth the test that would later be codified in section 775.021(4)(a), Florida Statutes . . .

F. HONAKER, v. STATE, 199 So. 3d 1068 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Id. at 143 (footnote omitted) (citing § 775.021(4)(b)3., Fla. Stat. (2011)). . . . United States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932)] same-elements test codified in section 775.021 . . .

W. PAWLEY, Sr. v. STATE, 199 So. 3d 309 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . . § 775.021(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (2013); Jackson v. . . .

GAULDEN, v. STATE, 195 So. 3d 1123 (Fla. 2016)

. . . . § 775.021(1), Fla. . . .

C. PATEL, v. KUMAR,, 196 So. 3d 468 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . As such, it is subject to the rule of construction prescribed by the legislature in section 775.021(1 . . .

R. BATCHELOR, v. STATE, 193 So. 3d 1054 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . criminal episode, we must next decide if the charges survive a same elements test as defined by section 775.021 . . .

COLLINS, v. STATE, 189 So. 3d 342 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . See 4 775.021(1), Fla. Stat. (2014); Kasischke v. . . .

WALKER, v. STATE, 193 So. 3d 946 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . United States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932) (codified in § 775.021(4), Fla. . . .

PAUL, v. STATE, 188 So. 3d 985 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . See also § 775.021(4)(a)-(b), Fla. Stat. (1995); Roughton v. . . . So.2d 1206 (Fla.1997) and holding that “a double jeopardy analysis must — in accordance with section 775.021 . . .

DAMOAH, v. STATE, 189 So. 3d 316 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . The lenity principle codified at section 775.021(l)-(2), Florida . . . .

In STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES- INSTRUCTIONS A A, 190 So. 3d 1055 (Fla. 2016)

. . . . §. 775.021(5), Fla. Stat. . . . Stat. § 775.021(5), Fla. . . . Give if applicable. § 775.021(5)(b), Fla, Stat. . . .

M. M. a v. STATE, 187 So. 3d 300 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . One statute that plainly controls in this case is section 775.021(1), Florida Statutes (2014), which . . . If this is true — and it surely is— then we are plainly directed by section 775.021(1) to read the statute . . . The majority seeks to avoid section 775.021(1) by casting the plain reading of the statute as unreasonable . . .

WILLIAMS, v. STATE, 186 So. 3d 989 (Fla. 2016)

. . . .” § 775.021(1), Fla. Stat. . . . State, 711 So.2d 524, 524 (Fla.l998));: see also § 775.021(4)(a), Fla. . . . State, 394 So.2d 1046, 1050 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) (“[I]t is clear that Section 775.021(4), Florida Statutes . . .

HARRISON, v. STATE, 198 So. 3d 765 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . 1068 (Fla.2009) (receding from precedent that applied the “primary evil” test to interpret section 775.021 . . .

ROUGHTON, v. STATE, 185 So. 3d 1207 (Fla. 2016)

. . . Our analysis turns on the rule of construction in section 775.021(4), Florida Statutes (2008); regarding . . . United States, 284 U.S. 299, 304, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932), and codified in section 775.021( . . . Under the basic rule of Blockburger and section 775.021(4)(a), if “each offense requires proof of an . . . And section 775.021(4) requires analysis based on the formal elements of the crimes. . . . ](1) to determine legislative intent.” § 775.021(4)(b),‘ Fla. . . . Thus, section 775.021(4)(a), Florida Statutes — -which requires a double jeopardy analysis to be conducted . . .

READY, v. STATE, 183 So. 3d 1234 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . United States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932), which has been codified in section 775.021 . . . The next question then is whether, under section 775.021(4), double jeopardy applies to bar the dual . . . Offenses which are lesser offenses the statutory elements of which are subsumed by the greater offense. § 775.021 . . . because all the elements of soliciting are included in the traveling offense, it appears that section 775.021 . . . solicitation, the offenses are the same for purposes of the Blockburger same-elements test codified in section 775.021 . . .

WILLIAMSON, v. STATE, 180 So. 3d 1224 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . See § 775.021(1), Fla. Stat. . . .

FRANCIS, v. STATE, 208 So. 3d 105 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . . §§ 775.021(3)(c), 921.1402(2)(d), Fla. Stat. (2014). REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS. . . .

R. CREWS, v. STATE, 183 So. 3d 329 (Fla. 2015)

. . . Kasischke, 991 So.2d at 814 (citing section 775.021(1), Florida Statutes). . . . generally accepted principles of statutory construction and by the rule of lenity set forth in section 775.021 . . . The rule of lenity, as expressed in section 775.021(1), applies when a statute is “susceptible of differing . . . See § 775.021(1), Fla. . . .

STATE v. W. TUTTLE, Jr., 177 So. 3d 1246 (Fla. 2015)

. . . The court also held that pursuant to Pizzo and section 775.021(4)(b)3., Florida Statutes (2010), which . . . United States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932), in section 775.021(4), Florida Statutes . . . United States, 284 U.S. 299, 304, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932); see § 775.021(4), Fla. . . . provided by statute, and lesser offenses which have elements wholly subsumed by the greater offense. § 775.021 . . . adjudication of the defendant as guilty for both offenses would violate double jeopardy and section 775.021 . . . conviction must be set aside, the majority purports to rely on the “plain and ordinary meaning” of section 775.021 . . .

J. J. v. STATE, 181 So. 3d 522 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Chubbuck, 141 So.3d 1163, 1170 (Fla.2014); see also § 775.021(1), Fla. . . .

STATE v. WRIGHT, v., 180 So. 3d 1043 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . .” § 775.021(1), Fla. Stat. (2014); see Thompson v. State, 695 So.2d 691, 693 (Fla.1997). . . .

In STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES- REPORT NO., 176 So. 3d 938 (Fla. 2015)

. . . Homicide does not specifically provide for a separate offense for death of an unborn child, section 775.021 . . . See § 775.021(5), Fla. Stat. 1. a. (Victim) is dead. b. . . . Section 775.021(5) provides as follows: Whoever commits an act that violates a provision of this code . . . not otherwise specifically provide a separate offense for such death or injury to an unborn child. § 775.021 . . .

MEYTHALER, v. STATE, 175 So. 3d 918 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . solicitation, the offenses are the same for purposes of the Blockburger same-elements test codified in section 775.021 . . .

JACKSON, v. STATE, 175 So. 3d 368 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . See § 775.021(4), Fla. . . .

RAMROOP, v. STATE, 174 So. 3d 584 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . As stated in section 775.021, “The provisions of this code and offenses defined by other statutes shall . . . is susceptible of differing constructions, it shall be construed most favorably to the accused.” § 775.021 . . .

BRADLEY, v. STATE, 174 So. 3d 1052 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . that Appellant committed two separate crimes for the purpose of evaluating the application of section 775.021 . . . The trial court is required by section 775.021(4)(a) to sentence a defendant separately on each charge . . .

B. MAYS, v. STATE, 198 So. 3d 35 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Section 775.021(4), Florida Statutes (2011), expresses the Legislature’s intention that a defendant be . . . ojffenses which are lesser offenses the statutory elements of which are subsumed by the greater offense.” § 775.021 . . . See § 775.021(4)(b)(3). The remedy is to vacate the conviction for the lesser offense. . . .

SCHOONOVER, v. STATE, 176 So. 3d 994 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Tuttle addressed the issue of how to determine a lesser offense under section 775.021(4)(b)(3), Florida . . . conflict, Schoonover mistakenly asserts that this court found a double jeopardy violation under section 775.021 . . . ), Florida Statutes, specifically under his erroneous “degree variant” argument pursuant to section 775.021 . . . However, our opinion did not address Schoonover’s double jeopardy arguments under section 775.021(4)( . . . Because our decision emanated from the above analysis, not from section 775.021(4)(b), it was not necessary . . .

HOLT, v. STATE, 173 So. 3d 1079 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . whether separate punishments for the two convictions violate the Blockburger test, as codified in section 775.021 . . .

A. BROWN, v. STATE, 189 So. 3d 837 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Section 775.021(4), Florida Statutes (2007), which codifies the test established in Blockburger v. . . . element that the other does not, the court must then determine if one of the exceptions set forth in 775.021 . . . State, 572 So.2d 522, 526 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); see also § 775.021(4)(a), Fla. . . . Applying the test of section 775.021(4)(a), Florida Statutes (2007), to these elements, “each offense . . . that we should consider the two statutes as “degree .variants” of the same offense pursuant to section 775.021 . . .

GUN, v. STATE, 171 So. 3d 184 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . . § 775.021(1), Fla. Stat. . . .

J. CONNOLLY, Jr. v. STATE, 172 So. 3d 893 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . .” § 775.021(1), Fla. . . . Rodriguez and the language of section 775.087(1) lies “language susceptible of differing construction.” § 775.021 . . . . § 775.021(1), Fla. Stat. (1981); Houck v. . . .

STATE v. SHELLEY,, 176 So. 3d 914 (Fla. 2015)

. . . States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932),] ‘same-elements’ test pursuant to section 775.021 . . . solicitation, the offenses are the same for purposes of the Blockburger same-elements test codified in section 775.021 . . . See § 775.021(4)(a), Fla. . . .

HUTTO, v. STATE, 173 So. 3d 998 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . See § 775.021(4)(a) (codifying the Blockburger test: “offenses are separate if each offense requires . . . of the lesser included offense are always subsumed within those of the charged offense”); see also § 775.021 . . .

SMITH, v. STATE, 190 So. 3d 94 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . . § 775.021(1), Fla. Stat. Biller, 109 So.3d at 1241. The court reversed appellant’s convictions. . . .

McNEIL, v. STATE, 162 So. 3d 274 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . See § 775.021(1), Fla. Stat. (1991); Scates v. State, 603 So.2d 504 (Fla.1992); Lambert v. . . .

STODDARD, v. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,, 600 F. App'x 696 (11th Cir. 2015)

. . . . § 775.021(4)(b)(l); Blockburger, 284 U.S. at 304, 52 S.Ct. at 182. . . . Stat. § 775.021(4)(b); see Fla. . . . . § 775.021(4)(a) ("Whoever, in the course of one criminal transaction or episode, commits an act or . . .

MIZNER, v. STATE, 154 So. 3d 391 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Mizner’s convictions would not withstand scrutiny under a Blockburger analysis, as codified in section 775.021 . . . Section 775.021(4) provides in pertinent part as follows: (b) The intent of the Legislature is to convict . . .

PATTERSON, v. STATE, 153 So. 3d 307 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . See § 775.021(4), Fla. Stat. (2009); Blockburger v. . . .

SILVERS, v. STATE, 150 So. 3d 847 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Neither the battery statute, nor section 775.021(4), Florida Statutes, permits multiple convictions and . . .

STATE v. A. MOSLEY,, 149 So. 3d 684 (Fla. 2014)

. . . See § 775.021(4), Fla. . . .

JULIAO, v. STATE, 149 So. 3d 1151 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Section 775.021(4)(a), Florida Statutes (2009), requires the use of the Bloekbwrger “same elements” test . . . that the other does not, the court must then determine if one of the exceptions set forth in section 775.021 . . .

EXANTUS, v. STATE, 198 So. 3d 1 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Without a specific statement of legislative intent, we must apply the Block-burger analysis under section 775.021 . . .

CHAGNON, v. STATE, 148 So. 3d 527 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . The Block-burger test, as codified in section 775.021(4)(a), Florida Statutes (2014), considers offenses . . .