Sims v. State

574 So. 2d 312, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 1332, 1991 WL 18269
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 19, 1991·No. No. 90-586·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant Sims appeals the enhancement of his sentence as an habitual offender, imposed after he was convicted of selling cocaine. We reverse the sentence and remand for resentencing.

Defendant correctly asserts that the trial court erred in sentencing him as an habitual offender without making the necessary findings of fact required by section 755.-084(l)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp.1988).1 Smith v. State, 573 So.2d 194 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Power v. State, 568 So.2d 511 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). “These findings need not be reduced to writing as long as they are made in a reported judicial proceeding.” Power, 568 So.2d at 511-12, citing Parker v. State, 546 So.2d 727 (Fla.1989). Because the trial court did not make the findings required under the statute, the sentence is reversed and the cause is remanded for resentencing. The trial court may resen-tence defendant as an habitual offender if [313]*313it makes the necessary findings. Smith; Power.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Sims v. State, 574 So. 2d 312, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 1332, 1991 WL 18269 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

574 So. 2d 312 (Sims v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jefferson v. State
593 So. 2d 1230 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Banks v. State
575 So. 2d 755 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)