N.E.B. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

N.E.B. v. State

806 So. 2d 575, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 635, 2002 WL 100444

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 28, 2002

DocketNo. 1D01-1761

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 806 So. 2d 575 (N.E.B. 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

N.E.B. v. State, 806 So. 2d 575, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 635, 2002 WL 100444 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal filed pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We affirm the dispositions but vacate the disposition order and remand with instructions to enter separate disposition orders for each offense. See K.L.P. v. State, 783 So.2d 336, 336 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (“This Court has repeatedly stated that a separate order of adjudication and disposition must be entered for each juvenile offense.”).

ALLEN, C.J., MINER and DAVIS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal filed pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We affirm the dispositions but vacate the disposition order and remand with instructions to enter separate disposition orders for each offense. See K.L.P. v. State, 783 So.2d 336, 336 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (“This Court has repeatedly stated that a separate order of adjudication and disposition must be entered for each juvenile offense.”).

ALLEN, C.J., MINER and DAVIS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

806 So. 2d 575, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 635, 2002 WL 100444, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/neb-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack