Evans v. State

427 So. 2d 308, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 28964
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Evans v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 452 So. 2d 1040
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 22, 1983·No. No. 82-2380·Published

Opinion

DANIEL S. PEARSON, Judge.

The trial court’s denial of Evans’ claim for relief under Rule 3.850 is affirmed. Evans’ claim that he was entitled to be man-datorily classified and sentenced as a youthful offender under the then applicable provision of Section 958.04(2), Florida Statutes (Supp.1978), see Stancil v. State, 405 So.2d 426 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981), is patently without merit in that a person, as Evans, simultaneously convicted of more than one felony is not entitled to mandatory classification, State v. Goodson, 403 So.2d 1337 (Fla.1981), under either of the felonies, Abram v. State, 408 So.2d 215 (Fla.1981), notwithstanding that the convictions arise from a single criminal episode. Barnhill v. State, 406 So.2d 1112 (Fla.1981); Flores v. State, 406 So.2d 58 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).

Affirmed.

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

Evans v. State, 427 So. 2d 308, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 28964 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

427 So. 2d 308 (Evans v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Goodson
403 So. 2d 1337 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1981)
Stancil v. State
405 So. 2d 426 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Flores v. State
406 So. 2d 58 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Barnhill v. State
406 So. 2d 1112 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1981)
Abram v. State
408 So. 2d 215 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1981)