Dixon v. State
591 So. 2d 1151, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 677, 1992 WL 10910
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Dixon v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 546 So. 2d 1194 →
Opinion
The challenged judgments of conviction are affirmed. Because the court failed to make the necessary findings when sentencing the appellant as a habitual felony offender under section 775.084, Florida Statutes, the sentences are vacated and this case is remanded for resentencing. See Walker v. State, 462 So.2d 452 (Fla.1985), and Roberts v. State, 559 So.2d 289 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Dixon v. State, 591 So. 2d 1151, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 677, 1992 WL 10910 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).
591 So. 2d 1151 (Dixon v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Walker v. State
462 So. 2d 452 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1985)
Roberts v. State
559 So. 2d 289 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)