Robinson v. State

658 So. 2d 640, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 7968, 1995 WL 437255
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Robinson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 609 So. 2d 89
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 26, 1995·No. No. 94-03523·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges his sentence as a habitual offender to consecutive five-year terms of incarceration for burglary of a structure, grand theft and possession of burglary tools. The state concedes that all of the above offenses occurred during the same criminal episode. Thus, it is clear that the trial court erred in sentencing appellant to consecutive terms of incarceration. See Hale v. State, 630 So.2d 521 (Fla.1993); Green v. State, 643 So.2d 1177 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Koon v. State, 640 So.2d 1226 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). Under the habitual offender statute, when offenses occur in one criminal episode a trial court may not enhance the sentences and then increase the total penalty by ordering that the sentences run consecutively. Hale; Smith v. State, 632 So.2d 95 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994).

Accordingly, we affirm appellant’s convictions, reverse the sentences and remand with directions that appellant be resentenced to concurrent terms of incarceration.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and BLUE and LAZZARA, JJ., concur.

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

Robinson v. State, 658 So. 2d 640, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 7968, 1995 WL 437255 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

658 So. 2d 640 (Robinson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Smith v. State
632 So. 2d 95 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
Hale v. State
630 So. 2d 521 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1993)
Koon v. State
640 So. 2d 1226 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
Green v. State
643 So. 2d 1177 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)