Link v. State
537 So. 2d 696, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 360, 1989 WL 6226
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 31, 1989·No. No. 88-1491·Published·Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
The state concedes that the trial court erred in sentencing the defendant as an habitual offender because the trial court’s oral pronouncements were not supported by written, specific findings of fact. We, therefore, remand for the trial court to set forth a written factual basis for its habitual offender determination and to resen-tence the defendant. Watson v. State, 492 So.2d 831 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Link v. State, 537 So. 2d 696, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 360, 1989 WL 6226 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).
537 So. 2d 696 (Link v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Robinson v. State
540 So. 2d 265 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Stanley v. State
538 So. 2d 1390 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)