Petit-Homme v. State
This text of 616 So. 2d 642 (Petit-Homme 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.
Opinion
We affirm the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion to suppress. See Johnson v. State, 438 So.2d 774 (Fla.1983), cert, denied, 465 U.S. 1051, 104 S.Ct. 1329, 79 L.Ed.2d 724 (1984). However, we remand for resentencing to determine the appropriate credit for time spent in jail. The trial court informed appellant that he was entitled to such credit, and the only issue to be decided on remand is the actual number of days. See Brown v. State, 584 So.2d 209 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
616 So. 2d 642, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4736, 1993 WL 130961, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/petit-homme-v-state-fladistctapp-1993.