Hollingsworth v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hollingsworth v. State

912 So. 2d 1279, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 17218, 2005 WL 2863052

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 2, 2005

DocketNo. 2D04-2926

StatusPublished

This text of 912 So. 2d 1279 (Hollingsworth 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

Hollingsworth v. State, 912 So. 2d 1279, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 17218, 2005 WL 2863052 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

STRINGER, Judge.

Doriean K. Hollingsworth seeks review of her judgments and sentences for three counts of passing worthless checks and one count of fraudulent application for a driver’s license, and the revocation of her probation based on the alleged new law violations. We affirm the convictions and the revocation without comment but reverse and remand for the trial court to enter amended judgments and sentences in accordance with its timely ruling on Holl-ingsworth’s motion to correct sentencing error, which was filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2). See Diaz v. State, 901 So.2d 310, 311 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Weinheimer v. State, 829 So.2d 338, 338 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002).

Affirmed in part; reversed in part; and remanded.

KELLY and CANADY, JJ., Concur.

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

STRINGER, Judge.

Doriean K. Hollingsworth seeks review of her judgments and sentences for three counts of passing worthless checks and one count of fraudulent application for a driver’s license, and the revocation of her probation based on the alleged new law violations. We affirm the convictions and the revocation without comment but reverse and remand for the trial court to enter amended judgments and sentences in accordance with its timely ruling on Holl-ingsworth’s motion to correct sentencing error, which was filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2). See Diaz v. State, 901 So.2d 310, 311 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Weinheimer v. State, 829 So.2d 338, 338 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002).

Affirmed in part; reversed in part; and remanded.

KELLY and CANADY, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

912 So. 2d 1279, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 17218, 2005 WL 2863052, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hollingsworth-v-state-fladistctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack