State v. McCray

State v. McCray, 561 So. 2d 257 (Fla. 1990) · Supreme Court of Florida · May 3, 1990 · No. 73249

Summary

The Florida Supreme Court held that the legislature did not intend to punish the single act of selling a controlled substance in a container as both the sale of the drug and the separate delivery of drug paraphernalia. Applying the *Carawan* analysis, the court found that while the offenses have different statutory elements, they address the same evil—the transfer of drugs—and thus a single act cannot support multiple convictions under sections 893.13 and 893.147. The court noted this holding applies to cases arising before the 1988 amendment to section 775.021(4), which subsequently clarified legislative intent to allow separate punishments for offenses with different elements.

Court
Supreme Court of Florida
Writing for the Court
Per Curiam; Overton; Barkett; Grimes; Kogan; McDonald; Ehrlich; Shaw
Jurisdiction
Florida
Decision date
May 3, 1990
Docket number
73249
Procedural posture
Review of certified question from the First District Court of Appeal
Precedential value
Published
Parties
State of Florida v. Alphonso McCray
Disposition
approved

Topics

criminal procedureappellate procedureevidence

Practice areas

Criminal LawDrug OffensesStatutory Interpretation

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Florida Legislature intended to punish, as two separate offenses, the single act of sale of a controlled substance in a container (i.e., whether the legislature intended to punish the transfer of the container as a separate offense from the transfer of the drug itself)?

Holdings

  1. The Florida Legislature did not intend to punish as two separate offenses the single act of sale of a controlled substance in a container when the paraphernalia is used to facilitate the sale or delivery of drugs, for offenses committed prior to July 1, 1988.

Key quotations

Whether the Florida Legislature intended to punish, as two separate offenses, the single act of sale of a controlled substance in a container (i.e., whether the legislature intended to punish the transfer of the container as a separate offense from the transfer of the drug itself)? (258)
Accordingly, under Carawan, a single act cannot give rise to multiple convictions and sentences under the two sections. (259)
We answer the certified question in the negative as qualified above and approve the decision of the district court. (259)

Factual background

On two occasions in 1986, McCray sold an undercover police officer a 'twenty cent piece,' i.e., twenty dollars' worth of powdered cocaine in a plastic baggie. He was charged with multiple offenses including sale of cocaine, possession of cocaine, delivery of drug paraphernalia, and conspiracy. The baggies containing the cocaine were determined to be drug paraphernalia.

Procedural history

McCray was convicted in the trial court of two counts of sale of cocaine, two counts of possession of cocaine, two counts of delivery of drug paraphernalia, and one count of conspiracy to deliver cocaine. The First District Court of Appeal affirmed except it reversed the convictions for delivery of drug paraphernalia, and certified a question to the Florida Supreme Court.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…