McCall v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

McCall v. State

635 So. 2d 1066, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3922, 1994 WL 157014

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in McCall v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 583 So. 2d 411 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 29, 1994·No. No. 93-305·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellants’ judgment and sentence are affirmed, but we vacate the order finding him to be an habitual felony offender in circuit court case number CR92-305. In that ease appellant was charged with a violation of probation based on his commission of a crime in a later case in which he was habitualized. The habitualization order in CR92-305 appears to be a scrivener’s error that is inconsistent with the oral pronouncement at the sentencing hearing. Habitualization for ease number CR92-7668, the later case, was correct.

JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED; ORDER OF HABITUALIZATION IN CR92-305 VACATED.

W. SHARP, PETERSON and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellants’ judgment and sentence are affirmed, but we vacate the order finding him to be an habitual felony offender in circuit court case number CR92-305. In that ease appellant was charged with a violation of probation based on his commission of a crime in a later case in which he was habitualized. The habitualization order in CR92-305 appears to be a scrivener’s error that is inconsistent with the oral pronouncement at the sentencing hearing. Habitualization for ease number CR92-7668, the later case, was correct.

JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED; ORDER OF HABITUALIZATION IN CR92-305 VACATED.

W. SHARP, PETERSON and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur.

McCall v. State, 635 So. 2d 1066, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3922, 1994 WL 157014 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

635 So. 2d 1066 (McCall v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.