Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Rahming v. State

Rahming v. State

616 So. 2d 1232, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4997, 1993 WL 140112
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 5, 1993
DocketNo. 92-2204
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 616 So. 2d 1232 (Rahming 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
Rahming v. State, 616 So. 2d 1232, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4997, 1993 WL 140112 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s sentences, except we reverse the imposition of the consecutive mandatory minimum sentences and remand for resentencing in accordance with this opinion. Because appellant’s offenses occurred during a single, continuous criminal episode, consecutive mandatory minimum sentences were improper. Palmer v. State, 438 So.2d 1 (Fla.1983); Cox v. State, 605 So.2d 978 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED.

GLICKSTEIN, C.J., GUNTHER, J., and WALDEN, JAMES H., Senior Judge, concur.

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

Related

Lifred v. State
643 So. 2d 94 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
616 So. 2d 1232, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4997, 1993 WL 140112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rahming-v-state-fladistctapp-1993.