Brown v. State

568 So. 2d 1004, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 8243, 1990 WL 162397
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Brown v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 524 So. 2d 730
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 26, 1990·No. No. 90-02740·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In his postconviction relief motion, the appellant contends that the trial court made constitutional sentencing errors when imposing sentence on a three count information. The trial court denied the motion stating that the information at issue (89-15934) charged only one count. Accordingly, the appellant’s allegations would have been without merit. However, the trial court understandably overlooked the appellant’s companion case (89-10526) which contains the additional charges referenced in the appellant’s motion.

We reverse the summary denial of the appellant’s motion and remand to the trial court with directions to the court to determine the sufficiency of the motion, and the allegations contained therein, as applied to circuit court case numbers 89-15934 and 89-10526.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and LEHAN and PARKER, JJ., concur.

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

Brown v. State, 568 So. 2d 1004, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 8243, 1990 WL 162397 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

568 So. 2d 1004 (Brown v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.