Parker v. State

538 So. 2d 978, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 545, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 956, 1989 WL 15934
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 28, 1989·No. No. 88-651·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ZEHMER, Judge.

We affirm the legality of the sentence and the trial court’s determination to sentence defendant, Timmie L. Parker, as an habitual offender. The sentencing court’s findings of fact in support of that determination need not be stated in writing so long as such findings are stated at a reported hearing. Adams v. State, 376 So.2d 47 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). We decline to follow the second district’s decision requiring such findings to be in writing, Hoefert v. State, 509 So.2d 1090 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), and certify direct conflict to the supreme court.

AFFIRMED.

SHIVERS and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

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

Parker v. State, 538 So. 2d 978, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 545, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 956, 1989 WL 15934 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

538 So. 2d 978 (Parker v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Parker v. State
546 So. 2d 727 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1989)