B.K.W. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

B.K.W. v. State

732 So. 2d 447, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 5625, 1999 WL 270458

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 5, 1999

DocketNo. 98-3650

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 732 So. 2d 447 (B.K.W. v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

B.K.W. v. State, 732 So. 2d 447, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 5625, 1999 WL 270458 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

B.K.W. and T.T.D. appeal disposition orders entered after they were adjudicated delinquent for armed burglary and grand theft. They contend that a separate disposition order is required for each offense, and that the challenged orders can be read to authorize supervision for more than the five-year statutory maximum authorized for grand theft committed by an adult. Agreeing with their first contention, we need not reach their second contention. We reverse and remand for entry of four separate disposition orders. See K.M.P. v. State, 24 Fla. L. Weekly D420, 420, — So.2d-,-, 1999 WL 77746 (Fla. 1st DCA Feb. 12, 1999); A.F. v. State, 718 [448]*448So.2d 260, 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); A.L.W. v. State, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2227, D2227, — So.2d -, -, 1997 WL 578660 (Fla. 1st DCA Sept.16, 1997), approved, 717 So.2d 913 (Fla.1998); J.M.J. v. State, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D1673, D1673, — So.2d -, -, 1997 WL 369951 (Fla. 1st DCA July 7, 1997), approved, State v. T.M.B., 716 So.2d 269 (Fla.1998); G.R.A. v. State, 688 So.2d 1027 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); E.Y. v. State, 670 So.2d 1079 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).

Reversed and remanded.

MINER, BENTON, and BROWNING, JJ., CONCUR.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

B.K.W. and T.T.D. appeal disposition orders entered after they were adjudicated delinquent for armed burglary and grand theft. They contend that a separate disposition order is required for each offense, and that the challenged orders can be read to authorize supervision for more than the five-year statutory maximum authorized for grand theft committed by an adult. Agreeing with their first contention, we need not reach their second contention. We reverse and remand for entry of four separate disposition orders. See K.M.P. v. State, 24 Fla. L. Weekly D420, 420, — So.2d-,-, 1999 WL 77746 (Fla. 1st DCA Feb. 12, 1999); A.F. v. State, 718 [448]*448So.2d 260, 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); A.L.W. v. State, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2227, D2227, — So.2d -, -, 1997 WL 578660 (Fla. 1st DCA Sept.16, 1997), approved, 717 So.2d 913 (Fla.1998); J.M.J. v. State, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D1673, D1673, — So.2d -, -, 1997 WL 369951 (Fla. 1st DCA July 7, 1997), approved, State v. T.M.B., 716 So.2d 269 (Fla.1998); G.R.A. v. State, 688 So.2d 1027 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); E.Y. v. State, 670 So.2d 1079 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).

Reversed and remanded.

MINER, BENTON, and BROWNING, JJ., CONCUR.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

732 So. 2d 447, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 5625, 1999 WL 270458, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bkw-v-state-fladistctapp-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack