Burgess v. State

660 So. 2d 415, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 9925, 1995 WL 552982
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Burgess v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 630 So. 2d 666
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 20, 1995·No. No. 95-2427·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Because of the recent decision in State v. Callaway, 658 So.2d 983 (Fla.1995), which was published after the trial court’s denial of defendant’s untimely rule 3.850 motion, the state concedes that defendant is now entitled to have the motion granted so that he can be resenteneed in accordance with Hale v. State, 630 So.2d 521 (Fla.1993), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 278, 130 L.Ed.2d 195 (1994) (consecutive habitual felony offender sentences for multiple offenses arising out of the same criminal episode are not authorized by statute).

Reversed.

GUNTHER, C.J., and DELL and KLEIN, JJ., concur.

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

Burgess v. State, 660 So. 2d 415, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 9925, 1995 WL 552982 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

660 So. 2d 415 (Burgess v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hale v. State
630 So. 2d 521 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1993)
State v. Callaway
658 So. 2d 983 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1995)