Mitz v. State
576 So. 2d 438, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2569, 1991 WL 40054
Opinion
The conviction of appellant is affirmed. However, the sentencing of appellant as an habitual offender is reversed. The state concedes that under the 1988 version of section 775.084(1), Florida Statutes the state failed to prove that “the offenses after the primary one were in each case committed subsequent to conviction for the preceding offense.” Perry v. Mayo, 72 So.2d 382 (Fla.1954). See also Wilken v. State, 531 So.2d 1011 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988).
Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded for resentencing.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Mitz v. State, 576 So. 2d 438, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2569, 1991 WL 40054 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).
576 So. 2d 438 (Mitz v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Perry v. Mayo
72 So. 2d 382 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1954)
Wilken v. State
531 So. 2d 1011 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)