Pearson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Pearson v. State

576 So. 2d 433, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2668, 1991 WL 38148

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 22, 1991

DocketNo. 90-02412

StatusPublished

This text of 576 So. 2d 433 (Pearson 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

Pearson v. State, 576 So. 2d 433, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2668, 1991 WL 38148 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the appellant’s conviction for arson of an occupied dwelling. We agree with the appellant’s contention that the trial court erred in sentencing him under the violent habitual offender statute for an offense which occurred prior to the effective date of that statute. Binstead v. State, 565 So.2d 419 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). Accordingly, we vacate the sentence imposed and remand to the trial court for resentencing. On remand, the trial court may impose an habitual offender sentence, if appropriate under section 775.084(4)(a), Florida Statutes (1987), if the proper findings are made. Smith v. State, 561 So.2d 1281 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990).

Additionally, we find that the appellant waived any objection to the court-assessed lien for attorney’s fees, however, we strike the imposed court costs without prejudice to the state to seek reimposition after proper notice and opportunity to be heard.

Reversed and remanded for resentenc-ing.

SCHOONOVER, C.J., and RYDER and CAMPBELL, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the appellant’s conviction for arson of an occupied dwelling. We agree with the appellant’s contention that the trial court erred in sentencing him under the violent habitual offender statute for an offense which occurred prior to the effective date of that statute. Binstead v. State, 565 So.2d 419 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). Accordingly, we vacate the sentence imposed and remand to the trial court for resentencing. On remand, the trial court may impose an habitual offender sentence, if appropriate under section 775.084(4)(a), Florida Statutes (1987), if the proper findings are made. Smith v. State, 561 So.2d 1281 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990).

Additionally, we find that the appellant waived any objection to the court-assessed lien for attorney’s fees, however, we strike the imposed court costs without prejudice to the state to seek reimposition after proper notice and opportunity to be heard.

Reversed and remanded for resentenc-ing.

SCHOONOVER, C.J., and RYDER and CAMPBELL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

576 So. 2d 433, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2668, 1991 WL 38148, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pearson-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack