Hall v. State
352 So. 2d 936, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 16866
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Hall v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 358 So. 2d 891 →
Opinion
The orders revoking appellant’s probation and sentencing him to two consecutive ten year terms are affirmed, but these cases are remanded for resentencing of appellant. The present sentences do 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 sentences is improper. Brooks v. State, supra. The appellant does not have to be present at re-sentencing.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hall v. State, 352 So. 2d 936, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 16866 (Fla. Ct. App. 1977).
352 So. 2d 936 (Hall v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Brooks v. State
349 So. 2d 794 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1977)