Rome v. State

603 So. 2d 723, 1992 WL 212025
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedSeptember 2, 1992
Docket91-3106
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 603 So. 2d 723 (Rome 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
Rome v. State, 603 So. 2d 723, 1992 WL 212025 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

603 So.2d 723 (1992)

Kenneth Anthony ROME, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 91-3106.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

September 2, 1992.

*724 Nancy Daniels, Public Defender, Nancy L. Showalter, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Carolyn J. Mosley, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

ERVIN, Judge.

Because the trial court failed to make the requisite findings mandated under Section 775.084(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1989), when it sentenced appellant as a habitual felony offender, appellant's sentences must be reversed and the case remanded for resentencing. Walker v. State, 462 So.2d 452 (Fla. 1985).

REVERSED and REMANDED for resentencing.

MINER and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Gaines v. State
605 So. 2d 1030 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Toombs v. State
605 So. 2d 952 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Ammons v. State
606 So. 2d 1210 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Barfield v. State
605 So. 2d 569 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
603 So. 2d 723, 1992 WL 212025, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rome-v-state-fladistctapp-1992.