Bolden v. State

4 So. 3d 788, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 2237, 2009 WL 703376
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 19, 2009·No. 1D08-1706·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges his conviction and sentence for armed burglary. We find no error as to the conviction but determine, as correctly conceded by the State, that there was insufficient evidence establishing that appellant was in actual possession of a firearm during the burglary. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment and life sentence but strike the mandatory minimum portion of the sentence and remand for the trial court to correct the sentence. Appellant need not be present when the trial court makes the necessary correction. Williams v. State, 997 So.2d 486 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008).

WOLF, BENTON, and BROWNING, JJ., concur.

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

Bolden v. State, 4 So. 3d 788, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 2237, 2009 WL 703376 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

4 So. 3d 788 (Bolden v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Robinson v. State
16 So. 3d 229 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2009)