Ross v. State

848 So. 2d 456, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 9937, 2003 WL 21504924
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Ross v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 804 So. 2d 359
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 2, 2003·No. No. 4D02-835·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s convictions, but, upon proper concession by the State, reverse his sentence and remand for resen-tencing, during which the trial court will again have discretion to sentence appellant as a habitual offender upon proper proof of convictions and findings of fact required by statute. See Cameron v. State, 807 So.2d 744 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Montgomery v. State, 770 So.2d 236 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); and Harris v. State, 737 So.2d 1159 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED and REMANDED, in part.

TAYLOR, HAZOURI and MAY, JJ., concur.

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

Ross v. State, 848 So. 2d 456, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 9937, 2003 WL 21504924 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

848 So. 2d 456 (Ross v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Harris v. State
737 So. 2d 1159 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)
Cameron v. State
807 So. 2d 744 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Montgomery v. State
770 So. 2d 236 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)