Case ID: so2d_443/html/0507-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Carl P. HENSON, Respondent.
    No. 83-1871.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    Jan. 18, 1984.
    Michael J. Satz, State Atty. and Teresa Beazley Widmer, Asst. State Atty., Fort Lauderdale, for petitioner.
    H. Dohn Williams, Jr., of Varón, Bogen-schutz, Williams & Gulkin, P.A., Hollywood, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

The circuit court, acting in its appellate capacity, ruled that the state must charge violations of Sections 316.193(l)(a) and (b), Florida Statutes (1982) in separate counts of an information rather than combining allegations as to (a) and (b), as alternative theories of prosecution in a single count. We find no error in that ruling. Cf United States v. Starks, 515 F.2d 112 (3d Cir. 1975) and United States v. Goodman, 285 F.2d 378 (5th Cir.1960), cert. denied, 366 U.S. 930, 81 S.Ct. 1651, 6 L.Ed.2d 389 (1961). Accordingly, we deny the state’s petition for writ of certiorari.

ANSTEAD, C.J., and DOWNEY and HURLEY, JJ., concur.