Nichols v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Nichols v. State

32 So. 3d 718, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 4789

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 7, 2010·No. 1D08-2043, 1D08-2044·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant challenges the sentences entered upon his revocation of probation. The state correctly concedes that, because his original sentences were concurrent, the appellant is entitled to credit for time served on each of the consecutive sentences to which he was resentenced. Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the trial court to award credit for time served to each sentence. See State v. Rabedeau, 2 So.3d 191, 193 (Fla.2009).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

HAWKES, C.J., ROBERTS, and CLARK, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant challenges the sentences entered upon his revocation of probation. The state correctly concedes that, because his original sentences were concurrent, the appellant is entitled to credit for time served on each of the consecutive sentences to which he was resentenced. Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the trial court to award credit for time served to each sentence. See State v. Rabedeau, 2 So.3d 191, 193 (Fla.2009).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

HAWKES, C.J., ROBERTS, and CLARK, JJ., concur.

Nichols v. State, 32 So. 3d 718, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 4789 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

32 So. 3d 718 (Nichols v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related