Kilpatrick v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kilpatrick v. State

622 So. 2d 1032, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 7676, 1993 WL 273711

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 21, 1993·No. No. 92-00176·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges his sentences for robbery without a gun, aggravated assault and grand theft. We affirm appellant’s sentences as a habitual offender based on [1033]*1033King v. State, 597 So.2d 309 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. denied, 602 So.2d 942 (Fla.1992). We do remand, however, for appellant’s sentence to be amended to reflect proper credit for time served as required by Tripp v. State, 622 So.2d 941, (Fla.1993).

FRANK, C.J., and RYDER and CAMPBELL, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges his sentences for robbery without a gun, aggravated assault and grand theft. We affirm appellant’s sentences as a habitual offender based on [1033]*1033King v. State, 597 So.2d 309 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. denied, 602 So.2d 942 (Fla.1992). We do remand, however, for appellant’s sentence to be amended to reflect proper credit for time served as required by Tripp v. State, 622 So.2d 941, (Fla.1993).

FRANK, C.J., and RYDER and CAMPBELL, JJ., concur.

Kilpatrick v. State, 622 So. 2d 1032, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 7676, 1993 WL 273711 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

622 So. 2d 1032 (Kilpatrick v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related