Hutchinson v. State
This text of 770 So. 2d 1156 (Hutchinson v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
We have for review Hutchinson v. State, 731 So.2d 812 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), based on conflict with State v. Rhoden, 448 So.2d 1013 (Fla.1984). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.
We recently held that section 924.051, Florida Statutes (Supp.1996), applies to juveniles who are charged, tried, and convicted in adult criminal proceedings. See Cargle v. State, 770 So.2d 1151, 1153-54 (Fla.2000). Based on our decision in Car-gle, we approve the district court’s decision below that applied section 924.051 to petitioner’s failure to raise with the trial court, under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b), the sentencing judge’s failure to address in writing the decision to impose adult sanctions under section 39.059(7), Florida Statutes (1995). Accordingly, we approve the decision below.1
It is so ordered.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
770 So. 2d 1156, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 707, 2000 Fla. LEXIS 1890, 2000 WL 1354131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hutchinson-v-state-fla-2000.