Miller v. State

423 So. 2d 623, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 22337
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Miller v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 403 So. 2d 1017
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 22, 1982·No. No. 81-2421·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We remand this ease with instructions for the trial court to vacate that part of appellant’s sentence which requires the appellant to make restitution as a condition of parole and to strike the assessment of $10.00 costs because appellant is indigent. In all other respects, we affirm the conviction, judgment and sentence. See Stewart v. State, 420 So.2d 862 (Fla.1982), Leary v. State, 406 So.2d 1222 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) and Williams v. State, 400 So.2d 542 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).

AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART and REMANDED for correction of sentence.

HURLEY and DELL, JJ., and WILLIAM C. OWEN, Jr., Associate Judge, concur.

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

Miller v. State, 423 So. 2d 623, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 22337 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

423 So. 2d 623 (Miller v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Leary v. State
406 So. 2d 1222 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Williams v. State
400 So. 2d 542 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Stewart v. State
420 So. 2d 862 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1982)