Gates v. State
535 So. 2d 359, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 157, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 10, 1989 WL 88
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 4, 1989·No. No. 87-3063·Published·Cited by 4 cases
Opinion
The record shows that during the oral pronouncement of sentence, the trial judge made inconsistent statements concerning whether he intended to impose consecutive or concurrent sentences on appellant. The sentences rendered maintained this inconsistency. Therefore, we affirm appellant’s convictions and remand this cause to the trial court with directions to clarify the sentences imposed and to enter such corrected sentencing orders as may be appropriate.
[360]*360AFFIRMED IN PART and REMANDED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Gates v. State, 535 So. 2d 359, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 157, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 10, 1989 WL 88 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).
535 So. 2d 359 (Gates v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Kathleen Maier Coello v. State of Florida
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2024
Tory v. State
686 So. 2d 689 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
Mitchell v. State
681 So. 2d 891 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
Newton v. State
603 So. 2d 558 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)