Hicks v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hicks v. State

815 So. 2d 753, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 6101, 2002 WL 857339

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 7, 2002

DocketNo. 1D99-4117

StatusPublished

This text of 815 So. 2d 753 (Hicks 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

Hicks v. State, 815 So. 2d 753, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 6101, 2002 WL 857339 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Our original decision in this case, Hicks v. State, 755 So.2d 815 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), was reviewed by the supreme court concerning the applicability of the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act to the offense of burglary of an unoccupied dwelling. The supreme court has remanded the case to this court for reconsideration in light of State v. Huggins, 802 So.2d 276 (Fla.2001). In Huggins, the court held that burglary of an unoccupied dwelling is not subject to prison releasee reoffender sentencing. The appellant was therefore improperly sentenced as a prison releasee reoffender.

We accordingly withdraw our April 20, 2000, opinion in this case, affirm the appellant’s convictions, vacate his sentences, and remand this case to the trial court for re-sentencing.

AFFIRMED in part; VACATED in part; and REMANDED for re-sentencing.

ALLEN, C.J., BENTON and POLSTON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Our original decision in this case, Hicks v. State, 755 So.2d 815 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), was reviewed by the supreme court concerning the applicability of the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act to the offense of burglary of an unoccupied dwelling. The supreme court has remanded the case to this court for reconsideration in light of State v. Huggins, 802 So.2d 276 (Fla.2001). In Huggins, the court held that burglary of an unoccupied dwelling is not subject to prison releasee reoffender sentencing. The appellant was therefore improperly sentenced as a prison releasee reoffender.

We accordingly withdraw our April 20, 2000, opinion in this case, affirm the appellant’s convictions, vacate his sentences, and remand this case to the trial court for re-sentencing.

AFFIRMED in part; VACATED in part; and REMANDED for re-sentencing.

ALLEN, C.J., BENTON and POLSTON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

815 So. 2d 753, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 6101, 2002 WL 857339, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hicks-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack