Martin v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Martin v. State

777 So. 2d 461, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 1396, 2001 WL 121964

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 14, 2001

DocketNo. 4D99-3279

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 777 So. 2d 461 (Martin 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

Martin v. State, 777 So. 2d 461, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 1396, 2001 WL 121964 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s conviction but remand for resentencing as appellant’s sentences were imposed pursuant to both the Habitual Violent Felony Offender statute and the Prison Releasee Reoffender stat[462]*462ute. On remand, the trial court should sentence him only under the Prison Releasee Reoffender statute. See Grant v. State, 770 So.2d 655 (Fla.2000); Yehowshua v. State, 773 So.2d 654 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000).

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part and REMANDED.

FARMER, KLEIN and TAYLOR, JJ, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s conviction but remand for resentencing as appellant’s sentences were imposed pursuant to both the Habitual Violent Felony Offender statute and the Prison Releasee Reoffender stat[462]*462ute. On remand, the trial court should sentence him only under the Prison Releasee Reoffender statute. See Grant v. State, 770 So.2d 655 (Fla.2000); Yehowshua v. State, 773 So.2d 654 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000).

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part and REMANDED.

FARMER, KLEIN and TAYLOR, JJ, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

777 So. 2d 461, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 1396, 2001 WL 121964, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-state-fladistctapp-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack