Card v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Card v. State

708 So. 2d 353, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 4315, 1998 WL 186832

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 22, 1998

DocketNo. 97-1785

StatusPublished

This text of 708 So. 2d 353 (Card 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

Card v. State, 708 So. 2d 353, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 4315, 1998 WL 186832 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PEE CUEIAM.

We affirm on the issue of appellant’s re-sentencing. However, the judgments of conviction entered pursuant to the resentencing on April 24,1997 must be stricken, since they duplicate the offenses contained in the original judgment. To indicate that there has not been resentencing for new offenses, the trial court should enter an amended judgment dating back to the date of the original judgment.

STONE, C.J., GEOSS, J., and OWEN, WILLIAM C., Jr., Senior Judge, concur.

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

PEE CUEIAM.

We affirm on the issue of appellant’s re-sentencing. However, the judgments of conviction entered pursuant to the resentencing on April 24,1997 must be stricken, since they duplicate the offenses contained in the original judgment. To indicate that there has not been resentencing for new offenses, the trial court should enter an amended judgment dating back to the date of the original judgment.

STONE, C.J., GEOSS, J., and OWEN, WILLIAM C., Jr., Senior Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

708 So. 2d 353, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 4315, 1998 WL 186832, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/card-v-state-fladistctapp-1998.