Romano v. State

648 So. 2d 329, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 443, 1995 WL 25696
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJanuary 25, 1995
DocketNo. 94-1052
StatusPublished

This text of 648 So. 2d 329 (Romano 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
Romano v. State, 648 So. 2d 329, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 443, 1995 WL 25696 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the conviction and sentence, without prejudice to the appellant raising the ineffective assistance of counsel claims initially in the trial court. See Weber v. State, 411 So.2d 315 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). We reverse the restitution order because no restitution hearing was conducted. See section 775.089(6) and (7), Fla.Stat. (1993); Johnson v. State, 547 So.2d 300 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Therefore, this matter is returned to the trial court to set aside the restitution order for further proceedings thereafter.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part with directions.

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

Related

Johnson v. State
547 So. 2d 300 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Weber v. State
411 So. 2d 315 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
648 So. 2d 329, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 443, 1995 WL 25696, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/romano-v-state-fladistctapp-1995.