Lund v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Lund v. State

626 So. 2d 324, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 11562, 1993 WL 469341

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Lund v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 658 So. 2d 679 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 16, 1993·No. No. 93-439·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

As the State properly concedes, the sentences imposed by the trial court on Counts II, III, and V are improper since the sentences exceed the statutory maximum. See §§ 914.22(1), 843.02, 775.082(3)(d), 775.082(4), Florida Statutes (1989). The remaining points raised by the defendant lack merit. Accordingly, we reverse the defendant’s sentences as to Counts II, III, and V, and remand for resentencing consistent with this opinion.

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

PER CURIAM.

As the State properly concedes, the sentences imposed by the trial court on Counts II, III, and V are improper since the sentences exceed the statutory maximum. See §§ 914.22(1), 843.02, 775.082(3)(d), 775.082(4), Florida Statutes (1989). The remaining points raised by the defendant lack merit. Accordingly, we reverse the defendant’s sentences as to Counts II, III, and V, and remand for resentencing consistent with this opinion.

Lund v. State, 626 So. 2d 324, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 11562, 1993 WL 469341 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

626 So. 2d 324 (Lund v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.