Reyes v. State

642 So. 2d 644, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 8815, 1994 WL 498002
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Reyes v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 655 So. 2d 111
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 14, 1994·No. No. 93-1458·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

• We affirm defendant’s convictions. Defendant has not established that the asserted errors raised on appeal mandate reversal. See State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla. 1986). However, we reverse the sentences to the extent that the court imposed consecutive minimum mandatory sentences for counts II through VI. On remand, the trial court is directed to impose concurrent minimum mandatory sentences on those counts. State v. Boatwright, 559 So.2d 210 (Fla.1990); Ward v. State, 630 So.2d 217 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Weatherspoon v. State, 624 So.2d 405 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).

Convictions affirmed; sentences affirmed in part and reversed in part; and cause remanded for resentencing in accordance with this decision.

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

Reyes v. State, 642 So. 2d 644, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 8815, 1994 WL 498002 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

642 So. 2d 644 (Reyes v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Weatherspoon v. State
624 So. 2d 405 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
Ward v. State
630 So. 2d 217 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
State v. DiGuilio
491 So. 2d 1129 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1986)
State v. Boatwright
559 So. 2d 210 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1990)