Pendleton v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Pendleton v. State

543 So. 2d 459, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1286, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 3032, 1989 WL 57844

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 25, 1989

DocketNo. 88-2781

StatusPublished

This text of 543 So. 2d 459 (Pendleton 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

Pendleton v. State, 543 So. 2d 459, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1286, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 3032, 1989 WL 57844 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks review of his sentence, alleging the trial court failed to comply with § 39.111(7), Florida Statutes, which requires the consideration of six criteria before the suitability or not of adult sanctions is determined. In its answer brief, appellee concedes that appellant is entitled to resentencing in accordance with § 39.111(7), Florida Statutes.

Pursuant to Rule 9.315(b), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, we reverse. The sentence is vacated and this cause is remanded for resentencing. On remand, the trial court shall afford appellant adequate notice and the opportunity to object to the imposition of court costs. Jenkins v. State, 444 So.2d 947 (Fla.1984).

JOANOS, THOMPSON and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks review of his sentence, alleging the trial court failed to comply with § 39.111(7), Florida Statutes, which requires the consideration of six criteria before the suitability or not of adult sanctions is determined. In its answer brief, appellee concedes that appellant is entitled to resentencing in accordance with § 39.111(7), Florida Statutes.

Pursuant to Rule 9.315(b), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, we reverse. The sentence is vacated and this cause is remanded for resentencing. On remand, the trial court shall afford appellant adequate notice and the opportunity to object to the imposition of court costs. Jenkins v. State, 444 So.2d 947 (Fla.1984).

JOANOS, THOMPSON and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

543 So. 2d 459, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1286, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 3032, 1989 WL 57844, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pendleton-v-state-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack