Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
State v. Clayton
Citations: 780 So. 2d 243; 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 1335; 2001 WL 127654Docket: No. 5D00-259
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; February 15, 2001; Florida; State Appellate Court
The state appealed a trial court decision that granted Joseph Clayton's motion to dismiss a driving while license revoked charge based on double jeopardy. The trial court ruled that Clayton's earlier guilty plea to a related offense barred further prosecution. The state contended that the initial order lacked jurisdiction, claiming double jeopardy was therefore inapplicable. The court disagreed, affirming the trial court's decision. The case originated on June 6, 1999, when Clayton was stopped for a traffic violation and subsequently arrested due to a history of multiple license suspensions and an outstanding warrant. He was charged with driving while license suspended or revoked and was brought before Judge Blechman for arraignment. On June 11, 1999, Clayton pled guilty to driving while license suspended and served a 75-day sentence. On July 9, 1999, the state filed a new charge against Clayton for driving while license revoked as a habitual offender. Clayton filed a motion to dismiss the new charge on double jeopardy grounds, asserting he had already been convicted and sentenced for the same offense. During the hearing, the state argued that Judge Blechman lacked jurisdiction to accept Clayton's plea. However, the circuit court found that Judge Blechman was acting within his authority under an administrative order that temporarily assigned county court judges to circuit court duties due to a heavy case load. The court interpreted the administrative order as permitting Judge Blechman to act as a circuit court judge during the specified timeframe, which included the date of Clayton's plea. Consequently, the court concluded that double jeopardy applied, barring the second prosecution. The trial court's order was affirmed, with judges Harris and Pleus concurring.