LeBlanc v. State
This text of 985 So. 2d 1233 (LeBlanc 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.
Opinion
Roger D. LEBLANC, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Kevin R. Holtz, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Jeffrey R. Casey, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant's first point, the legality of the fines imposed as part of his habitual offender sentence, was not preserved by contemporaneous objection or rule 3.800 motion. Accordingly, we affirm on this point without prejudice for Appellant to file a rule 3.800 motion. Polite v. State, 847 So.2d 1156, 1157 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003).
We also affirm as to Appellant's second point. See Massey v. State, 609 So.2d 598 (Fla.1992).
AFFIRMED.
PALMER, C.J., TORPY and EVANDER, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
985 So. 2d 1233, 2008 WL 2774443, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leblanc-v-state-fladistctapp-2008.