Case Name: Albert LEGETTE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1997-05-21
Citations: 694 So. 2d 826
Docket Number: No. 95-03100
Parties: Albert LEGETTE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: PARKER, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND and LAZZARA, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 694
Pages: 826–827

Head Matter:
Albert LEGETTE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 95-03100.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
May 21, 1997.
William E. Taylor, Tampa, for Appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Anne E. Sheer, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Albert Legette appeals his judgment and sentences following his convictions of attempted robbery with a firearm and improper exhibition of a firearm. Mr. Legette contends that the dual convictions constitute a double jeopardy violation. Despite the state's concession of error on this issue, we conclude these two offenses each require proof of an element that the other does not. § 775.021(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (1993); Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932). Robbery requires that force, violence, or fear be used during the course of the offense. § 812.13, Fla. Stat. (1993). By contrast, improper exhibition requires neither force, violence, or fear. § 790.10, Fla. Stat. (1993). Improper exhibition is established when a weapon is exhibited in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner, whereas robbery does not require exhibition of the weapon in such a manner. Cf. Kase v. State, 581 So.2d 612 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (no double jeopardy violation for convictions of improper exhibition of a weapon and aggravated assault). Because the elements required to prove improper exhibition of a firearm are not subsumed in the attempted robbery with a firearm, these convictions do not result in a double jeopardy violation.
We also approve the trial court's imposition of the three-year minimum mandatory sentence for Mr. Legette's conviction for attempted robbery with a firearm. Although Mr. Legette was 20 years old when he committed this first offense, the trial court properly exercised its discretion in declining to impose a youthful offender sentence. See § 958.021, Fla. Stat. (1993); Ellis v. State, 475 So.2d 1021, 1023 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Affirmed.
PARKER, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND and LAZZARA, JJ., concur.