Donahue v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Donahue v. State

353 So. 2d 222, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 17032

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 28, 1977

DocketNo. 77-1137

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 353 So. 2d 222 (Donahue 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

Donahue v. State, 353 So. 2d 222, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 17032 (Fla. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed, but this case is remanded for resentencing of appellant. The present sentence does not specifically set forth the period of credit time to be allowed as required by Section 921.161(1), Florida Statutes (1975); Brooks v. State, 349 So.2d 794 (Fla.2d DCA 1977). Moreover the phrase “at hard labor” in the sentence is improper. Brooks v. State, supra. The appellant does not have to be present at resentencing.

HOBSON, Acting C. J., and GRIMES and RYDER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed, but this case is remanded for resentencing of appellant. The present sentence does not specifically set forth the period of credit time to be allowed as required by Section 921.161(1), Florida Statutes (1975); Brooks v. State, 349 So.2d 794 (Fla.2d DCA 1977). Moreover the phrase “at hard labor” in the sentence is improper. Brooks v. State, supra. The appellant does not have to be present at resentencing.

HOBSON, Acting C. J., and GRIMES and RYDER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

353 So. 2d 222, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 17032, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donahue-v-state-fladistctapp-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack