Hack v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hack v. State

574 So. 2d 1231, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 1528, 1991 WL 22983

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 28, 1991·No. No. 90-1012·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the order of probation imposed by the lower court and direct the court to hold a hearing on restitution on appellant’s motion. See A.P. v. State, 558 So.2d 519 (Fla.1990).

As in Flowers v. State, 567 So.2d 1055 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990), we certify to the supreme court the following question:

DO FLORIDA’S UNIFORM SENTENCING GUIDELINES REQUIRE THAT LEGAL CONSTRAINT POINTS BE ASSESSED FOR EACH OFFENSE COM[1232] MITTED WHILE UNDER LEGAL CONSTRAINT?

DAUKSCH, COBB and PETERSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the order of probation imposed by the lower court and direct the court to hold a hearing on restitution on appellant’s motion. See A.P. v. State, 558 So.2d 519 (Fla.1990).

As in Flowers v. State, 567 So.2d 1055 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990), we certify to the supreme court the following question:

DO FLORIDA’S UNIFORM SENTENCING GUIDELINES REQUIRE THAT LEGAL CONSTRAINT POINTS BE ASSESSED FOR EACH OFFENSE COM[1232] MITTED WHILE UNDER LEGAL CONSTRAINT?

DAUKSCH, COBB and PETERSON, JJ., concur.

Hack v. State, 574 So. 2d 1231, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 1528, 1991 WL 22983 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

574 So. 2d 1231 (Hack v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related