Devane v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Devane v. State

548 So. 2d 886, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2161, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 5003, 1989 WL 104493

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 14, 1989

DocketNo. 89-536

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 548 So. 2d 886 (Devane 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

Devane v. State, 548 So. 2d 886, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2161, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 5003, 1989 WL 104493 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order denying the defendant’s motion to correct sentence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800. The state concedes that the sentence should be corrected to reflect credit for time served on all counts for which the defendant was arrested and charged with on the same date. Daniels v. State, 491 So.2d 543 (Fla.1986). The state also concedes that it was improper for the trial court to retain jurisdiction over the defendant’s guidelines sentence. Hansbrough v. State, 509 So.2d 1081 (Fla.1987). Defendant’s third point on appeal, the extent of departure was previously reviewed by this court in the defendant’s appeal after resen-tencing. We decline to reconsider this point.

We reverse and remand with instructions to correct the sentence in accordance with this opinion.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

COBB and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.

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

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order denying the defendant’s motion to correct sentence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800. The state concedes that the sentence should be corrected to reflect credit for time served on all counts for which the defendant was arrested and charged with on the same date. Daniels v. State, 491 So.2d 543 (Fla.1986). The state also concedes that it was improper for the trial court to retain jurisdiction over the defendant’s guidelines sentence. Hansbrough v. State, 509 So.2d 1081 (Fla.1987). Defendant’s third point on appeal, the extent of departure was previously reviewed by this court in the defendant’s appeal after resen-tencing. We decline to reconsider this point.

We reverse and remand with instructions to correct the sentence in accordance with this opinion.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

COBB and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

548 So. 2d 886, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2161, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 5003, 1989 WL 104493, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/devane-v-state-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack