Rodriguez v. State
762 So. 2d 1067, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 9634, 2000 WL 1060410
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Rodriguez v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 719 So. 2d 1215 →
Opinion
We reverse the order denying Appellant’s motion to correct illegal sentence. Appellant’s' offense was committed within the window period during which the 1995 amendments to the sentencing guidelines were unconstitutional. Trapp v. State, 760 So.2d 924 (Fla.2000). On remand, the trial court shall determine whether re-sentencing is required. See Speed v. State, 764 So.2d 873 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Rodriguez v. State, 762 So. 2d 1067, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 9634, 2000 WL 1060410 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).
762 So. 2d 1067 (Rodriguez v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Speed v. State
764 So. 2d 873 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)
Trapp v. State
760 So. 2d 924 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2000)