Collins v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Collins v. State

571 So. 2d 583, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9818, 1990 WL 211733

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 28, 1990·No. No. 89-3130·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a corrected sentence as a habitual offender. We reject appellant’s arguments that the habitual offender statute is unconstitutional. See Pittman v. State, 570 So.2d 1045 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), and Roberts v. State, 559 So.2d 289 (Fla. 2d DCA), cause dismissed, 564 So.2d 488 (Fla.1990). We also disagree with appellant’s contention as to a lack of clarity in the correction and conclude that the corrected sentence eliminated the three-year minimum. Accordingly, we affirm.

LETTS, GLICKSTEIN and STONE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a corrected sentence as a habitual offender. We reject appellant’s arguments that the habitual offender statute is unconstitutional. See Pittman v. State, 570 So.2d 1045 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), and Roberts v. State, 559 So.2d 289 (Fla. 2d DCA), cause dismissed, 564 So.2d 488 (Fla.1990). We also disagree with appellant’s contention as to a lack of clarity in the correction and conclude that the corrected sentence eliminated the three-year minimum. Accordingly, we affirm.

LETTS, GLICKSTEIN and STONE, JJ., concur.

Collins v. State, 571 So. 2d 583, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9818, 1990 WL 211733 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

571 So. 2d 583 (Collins v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related