Pleasant v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Pleasant v. State

609 So. 2d 57, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 11334, 1992 WL 312761

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 29, 1992

DocketNo. 91-2546

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 609 So. 2d 57 (Pleasant 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

Pleasant v. State, 609 So. 2d 57, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 11334, 1992 WL 312761 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

Brett Todd Pleasant appeals a judgment and sentence adjudicating him guilty of two counts of armed robbery and sentencing him as a habitual felony offender to two concurrent terms of 25 years’ incarceration. We reverse and remand.

Appellant- first argues on appeal that the trial court committed fundamental error in sentencing him as a habitual felony offender without making the findings of fact required by section 775.084(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1991). Since the court’s failure to make the statutorily-required findings was fundamental error, Jones v. State, 606 So.2d 709 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Walker v. State, 462 So.2d 452, 454 (Fla.1985); Rolle v. State, 586 So.2d 1293 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991), we vacate the sentences and remand for resentencing. See Martin v. State, 592 So.2d 1219, 1220 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992).

Appellant also argues that the trial court reversibly erred in entering a written judgment and sentence adjudicating him guilty of two armed robberies, because the amended information charged him with, and the jury found him guilty of, one armed robbery and one attempted armed robbery. The state concedes error on this point. We reverse and remand for entry of a final judgment that correctly reflects the crimes of which appellant was convicted.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

ERVIN and. ZEHMER, JJ., concur. BARFIELD, J., dissents with opinion.

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

PER CURIAM.

Brett Todd Pleasant appeals a judgment and sentence adjudicating him guilty of two counts of armed robbery and sentencing him as a habitual felony offender to two concurrent terms of 25 years’ incarceration. We reverse and remand.

Appellant- first argues on appeal that the trial court committed fundamental error in sentencing him as a habitual felony offender without making the findings of fact required by section 775.084(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1991). Since the court’s failure to make the statutorily-required findings was fundamental error, Jones v. State, 606 So.2d 709 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Walker v. State, 462 So.2d 452, 454 (Fla.1985); Rolle v. State, 586 So.2d 1293 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991), we vacate the sentences and remand for resentencing. See Martin v. State, 592 So.2d 1219, 1220 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992).

Appellant also argues that the trial court reversibly erred in entering a written judgment and sentence adjudicating him guilty of two armed robberies, because the amended information charged him with, and the jury found him guilty of, one armed robbery and one attempted armed robbery. The state concedes error on this point. We reverse and remand for entry of a final judgment that correctly reflects the crimes of which appellant was convicted.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

ERVIN and. ZEHMER, JJ., concur. BARFIELD, J., dissents with opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

609 So. 2d 57, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 11334, 1992 WL 312761, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pleasant-v-state-fladistctapp-1992.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack