Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Stanford v. State

Stanford v. State

611 So. 2d 625, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 674, 1993 WL 17729
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJanuary 27, 1993
DocketNo. 91-01284
StatusPublished

This text of 611 So. 2d 625 (Stanford 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
Stanford v. State, 611 So. 2d 625, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 674, 1993 WL 17729 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Tyrone Stanford appeals his two sentences as a habitual felony offender. He received two ten year consecutive terms of imprisonment, resulting from revocation of probation. We affirm the sentences on the authority of Marshall v. State, 596 So.2d 114 (Fla. 2d DCA1992), and King v. State, 597 So.2d 309 (Fla. 2d DCA1991). We recognize affirming the sentences upon revocation of “habitualized” probation is in conflict with State v. Kendrick, 596 So.2d 1153 (Fla. 5th DCA1992).

Affirmed.

FRANK, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND and BLUE, JJ., concur.

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

Related

King v. State
597 So. 2d 309 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
State v. Kendrick
596 So. 2d 1153 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Marshall v. State
596 So. 2d 114 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
611 So. 2d 625, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 674, 1993 WL 17729, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stanford-v-state-fladistctapp-1993.