Link v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Link v. State

537 So. 2d 696, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 360, 1989 WL 6226

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 31, 1989

DocketNo. 88-1491

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 537 So. 2d 696 (Link 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

Link v. State, 537 So. 2d 696, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 360, 1989 WL 6226 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

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

PER CURIAM.

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).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

537 So. 2d 696, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 360, 1989 WL 6226, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/link-v-state-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack