Montesino v. State

640 So. 2d 1196, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 7662, 1994 WL 398354
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 2, 1994·No. No. 94-191·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We find no error in the sole point directed to the convictions entered below. See Nacher v. State, 465 So.2d 598 (Fla. 3d DCA1985). As the state concedes, however, it was improper to impose consecutive habitual offender sentences for offenses committed in the same criminal episode. See Hale v. State, 630 So.2d 521 (Fla.1993). Hence, after remand, those sentences shall be made concurrent.

Affirmed as modified.

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

Montesino v. State, 640 So. 2d 1196, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 7662, 1994 WL 398354 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

640 So. 2d 1196 (Montesino v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hale v. State
630 So. 2d 521 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1993)
Nacher v. State
465 So. 2d 598 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)