Pinacle v. State

573 So. 2d 925, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 11, 1991 WL 118
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJanuary 2, 1991
DocketNo. 90-64
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 573 So. 2d 925 (Pinacle 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
Pinacle v. State, 573 So. 2d 925, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 11, 1991 WL 118 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

As correctly agreed to by the state, the habitual offender sentence imposed below is vacated solely upon the ground that the trial court failed, as is required under the applicable statute, section 775.084, Florida Statutes (1987),1 to make specific findings of fact showing that an enhanced prison term is required for the protection of the public. Moreno v. State, 550 So.2d 1172 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). The cause is remanded for resentencing in accordance with Moreno. There is no merit in the appellant’s other contentions on appeal.

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

Related

Mazaheritehrani v. Brooks
573 So. 2d 925 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
573 So. 2d 925, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 11, 1991 WL 118, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pinacle-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.