Mendez v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Mendez v. State

103 So. 3d 257, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 21676, 2012 WL 6603087

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 19, 2012

DocketNo. 3D12-278

StatusPublished

This text of 103 So. 3d 257 (Mendez 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

Mendez v. State, 103 So. 3d 257, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 21676, 2012 WL 6603087 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

ON CONFESSION OF ERROR

SHEPHERD, J.

Enrique Lopez-Mendez appeals from the trial court’s denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800 motion. [258]*258Based upon Appellee’s proper and commendable confession of error and our independent review of the record, we reverse with directions to the trial court to vacate that portion of Mendez’s sentence on Count I which mandates he serve a twenty-five year minimum mandatory under the 10/20 Life statute, see § 775.087(2)(a)3, Fla. Stat. (1999), and remand for imposition of a twenty-year minimum mandatory. See § 775.087(2)(a)2, Fla. Stat. (1999).

In all other respects, we affirm.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and case remanded with directions.

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

ON CONFESSION OF ERROR

SHEPHERD, J.

Enrique Lopez-Mendez appeals from the trial court’s denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800 motion. [258]*258Based upon Appellee’s proper and commendable confession of error and our independent review of the record, we reverse with directions to the trial court to vacate that portion of Mendez’s sentence on Count I which mandates he serve a twenty-five year minimum mandatory under the 10/20 Life statute, see § 775.087(2)(a)3, Fla. Stat. (1999), and remand for imposition of a twenty-year minimum mandatory. See § 775.087(2)(a)2, Fla. Stat. (1999).

In all other respects, we affirm.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and case remanded with directions.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

103 So. 3d 257, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 21676, 2012 WL 6603087, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mendez-v-state-fladistctapp-2012.