State v. Valdes
This text of 677 So. 2d 107 (State v. Valdes) 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.
Opinion
The STATE of Florida, Appellant,
v.
Jorge L. VALDES, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General and Linda S. Katz, Assistant Attorney General, for appellant.
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Harvey J. Sepler, Assistant Public Defender, for appellee.
Before GODERICH, GREEN and FLETCHER, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Because the State failed to make a contemporaneous objection on the basis that the evidence presented at the sentencing hearing was insufficient under the Barbera[1]-Herrin[2] rule, the State did not preserve the issue for appellate review. State v. Rodriguez, 673 So.2d 187 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). Accordingly, *108 the downward departure sentence imposed by the trial court is affirmed.
Affirmed.
NOTES
[1] Barbera v. State, 505 So.2d 413 (Fla.1987).
[2] Herrin v. State, 568 So.2d 920 (Fla.1990).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
677 So. 2d 107, 1996 WL 426358, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-valdes-fladistctapp-1996.