McIntyre v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

McIntyre v. State

753 So. 2d 787, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 3720, 2000 WL 313581

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 29, 2000

DocketNo. 98-3016

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 753 So. 2d 787 (McIntyre 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

McIntyre v. State, 753 So. 2d 787, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 3720, 2000 WL 313581 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Johnny McIntyre appeals his convictions for armed robbery, aggravated assault and aggravated battery. Appointed counsel has filed an Anders¹ brief. Defendant-appellant McIntyre has filed a pro se brief. We conclude that the Anders proceeding is appropriate. As to appellant’s pro se brief contending that he does not qualify as a habitual offender, we conclude he does qualify. See Rollins v. State, 707 So.2d 823 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Johnny McIntyre appeals his convictions for armed robbery, aggravated assault and aggravated battery. Appointed counsel has filed an Anders¹ brief. Defendant-appellant McIntyre has filed a pro se brief. We conclude that the Anders proceeding is appropriate. As to appellant’s pro se brief contending that he does not qualify as a habitual offender, we conclude he does qualify. See Rollins v. State, 707 So.2d 823 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

753 So. 2d 787, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 3720, 2000 WL 313581, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcintyre-v-state-fladistctapp-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack