Bonard v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bonard v. State

666 So. 2d 597, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 404, 1996 WL 23598

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 24, 1996

DocketNos. 95-3643, 95-3645

StatusPublished

This text of 666 So. 2d 597 (Bonard 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

Bonard v. State, 666 So. 2d 597, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 404, 1996 WL 23598 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The denial of the petitioner’s 3.850 motion is hereby affirmed. However, because the trial court reserved ruling, pending resolution by the Florida Supreme Court, as to the third issue raised by the petitioner regarding the legality of enhancing sentences for multiple crimes committed during a single criminal episode by both sentencing a defendant as a habitual offender and ordering that the sentences be served consecutively, we remand this cause for disposition of this issue in accordance with State v. Hill, 660 So.2d 1384 (Fla.1995), approving 645 So.2d 90 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); State v. Parker, 660 So.2d 1393 (Fla.1995), approving 651 So.2d 140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); and Simmons v. State, 20 Fla. L. Weekly S509 (Fla. Oct. 5, 1995), approving 650 So.2d 126 (Fla.1995).

Affirmed and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM.

The denial of the petitioner’s 3.850 motion is hereby affirmed. However, because the trial court reserved ruling, pending resolution by the Florida Supreme Court, as to the third issue raised by the petitioner regarding the legality of enhancing sentences for multiple crimes committed during a single criminal episode by both sentencing a defendant as a habitual offender and ordering that the sentences be served consecutively, we remand this cause for disposition of this issue in accordance with State v. Hill, 660 So.2d 1384 (Fla.1995), approving 645 So.2d 90 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); State v. Parker, 660 So.2d 1393 (Fla.1995), approving 651 So.2d 140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); and Simmons v. State, 20 Fla. L. Weekly S509 (Fla. Oct. 5, 1995), approving 650 So.2d 126 (Fla.1995).

Affirmed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

666 So. 2d 597, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 404, 1996 WL 23598, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bonard-v-state-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack