Gilmore v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Gilmore v. State

668 So. 2d 1092, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 2046, 1996 WL 91548

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 5, 1996

DocketNo. 95-830

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 668 So. 2d 1092 (Gilmore 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

Gilmore v. State, 668 So. 2d 1092, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 2046, 1996 WL 91548 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s convictions and sentences for burglary with assault or battery, robbery, possession of cocaine, possession of drug paraphernalia and obstructing an officer without violence. We reverse, however, the trial court’s order of restitution because it was entered without notice or a hearing. Dubois v. State, 650 So.2d 228 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Rhoden v. State, 622 So.2d 122 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Harris v. State, 593 So.2d 1169 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). The state properly concedes error in the trial court’s imposition of restitution.

Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the trial court to hold a restitution hearing. The judgment and sentence are, in all other respects, affirmed.

JOANOS, BENTON and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s convictions and sentences for burglary with assault or battery, robbery, possession of cocaine, possession of drug paraphernalia and obstructing an officer without violence. We reverse, however, the trial court’s order of restitution because it was entered without notice or a hearing. Dubois v. State, 650 So.2d 228 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Rhoden v. State, 622 So.2d 122 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Harris v. State, 593 So.2d 1169 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). The state properly concedes error in the trial court’s imposition of restitution.

Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the trial court to hold a restitution hearing. The judgment and sentence are, in all other respects, affirmed.

JOANOS, BENTON and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

668 So. 2d 1092, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 2046, 1996 WL 91548, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gilmore-v-state-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack