State v. O'Neal

Supreme Court of Florida

State v. O'Neal

724 So. 2d 1187, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 41, 1999 Fla. LEXIS 3, 1999 WL 11777

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedJanuary 14, 1999

DocketNo. 92,769

StatusPublished

This text of 724 So. 2d 1187 (State v. O'Neal) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. O'Neal, 724 So. 2d 1187, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 41, 1999 Fla. LEXIS 3, 1999 WL 11777 (Fla. 1999).

Pincite

Opinions

SHAW, J.

We have for review O’Neal v. State, 707 So.2d 1190 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), wherein the district court certified conflict with Mays v. [1188]*1188State, 693 So.2d 52 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

We have since approved the district court decision in Mays. See Mays v. State, 717 So.2d 515 (Fla.1998) (holding that under section 921.001(5), Florida Statutes (1995), if the “true” recommended guidelines sentence exceeds the statutory maximum, the guidelines sentence must be imposed). Accordingly, we quash O’Neal.1

It is so ordered.

HARDING, C.J., WELLS, J., and OVERTON, Senior Justice, concur. PARIENTE, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with an opinion, in which ANSTEAD, J., and KOGAN, Senior Justice, concur.

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

SHAW, J.

We have for review O’Neal v. State, 707 So.2d 1190 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), wherein the district court certified conflict with Mays v. [1188]*1188State, 693 So.2d 52 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

We have since approved the district court decision in Mays. See Mays v. State, 717 So.2d 515 (Fla.1998) (holding that under section 921.001(5), Florida Statutes (1995), if the “true” recommended guidelines sentence exceeds the statutory maximum, the guidelines sentence must be imposed). Accordingly, we quash O’Neal.1

It is so ordered.

HARDING, C.J., WELLS, J., and OVERTON, Senior Justice, concur. PARIENTE, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with an opinion, in which ANSTEAD, J., and KOGAN, Senior Justice, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

724 So. 2d 1187, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 41, 1999 Fla. LEXIS 3, 1999 WL 11777, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-oneal-fla-1999.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack