Lagemann v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Lagemann v. State

400 So. 2d 1041, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20488

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 10, 1981

DocketNo. 80-2251

StatusPublished

This text of 400 So. 2d 1041 (Lagemann 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

Lagemann v. State, 400 So. 2d 1041, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20488 (Fla. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant raises two issues in his appeal from the judgment and sentence entered by the court below. The only issue which warrants action by this court is that involving the sentence of the court. Though the court adjudicated appellant guilty of seven counts, it imposed a general sentence of three years together with a $5,000 fine without specifying a sentence for each offense for which the appellant was found guilty. A general sentence in such a situation violates section 775.021, Florida Statutes (1979). Therefore, the judgments of guilt as to each charge are affirmed, but the case is remanded for the entry of a separate judgment and sentence on each conviction. See Fundak v. State, 362 So.2d 295 (Fla.2d DCA 1978).

HOBSON, Acting C. J., and DANAHY and CAMPBELL, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant raises two issues in his appeal from the judgment and sentence entered by the court below. The only issue which warrants action by this court is that involving the sentence of the court. Though the court adjudicated appellant guilty of seven counts, it imposed a general sentence of three years together with a $5,000 fine without specifying a sentence for each offense for which the appellant was found guilty. A general sentence in such a situation violates section 775.021, Florida Statutes (1979). Therefore, the judgments of guilt as to each charge are affirmed, but the case is remanded for the entry of a separate judgment and sentence on each conviction. See Fundak v. State, 362 So.2d 295 (Fla.2d DCA 1978).

HOBSON, Acting C. J., and DANAHY and CAMPBELL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

400 So. 2d 1041, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20488, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lagemann-v-state-fladistctapp-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack