Lacourse v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Lacourse v. State

593 So. 2d 619, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 1511, 1992 WL 29054

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 19, 1992·No. No. 91-01038·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

CASE, JAMES R., Associate Judge.

We affirm the defendant’s conviction and sentence upon his violation of probation.

We need not and do not address the defendant’s argument that he should not have been sentenced to probation after having been declared a habitual offender. The record on appeal does not indicate that the defendant objected to that probationary sentence when it was imposed nor did he timely appeal that sentence thereafter. His acceptance of probation constituted a waiver of the right to attack that probation at revocation. Thompson v. State, 591 So.2d 1114 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); see Wolfson v. State, 437 So.2d 174 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).

DANAHY, A.C.J., and THREADGILL, J., concur.

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

CASE, JAMES R., Associate Judge.

We affirm the defendant’s conviction and sentence upon his violation of probation.

We need not and do not address the defendant’s argument that he should not have been sentenced to probation after having been declared a habitual offender. The record on appeal does not indicate that the defendant objected to that probationary sentence when it was imposed nor did he timely appeal that sentence thereafter. His acceptance of probation constituted a waiver of the right to attack that probation at revocation. Thompson v. State, 591 So.2d 1114 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); see Wolfson v. State, 437 So.2d 174 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).

DANAHY, A.C.J., and THREADGILL, J., concur.

Lacourse v. State, 593 So. 2d 619, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 1511, 1992 WL 29054 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

593 So. 2d 619 (Lacourse v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related