Stevenson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Stevenson v. State

659 So. 2d 432, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 8527, 1995 WL 471663

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 11, 1995

DocketNo. 94-2893

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 659 So. 2d 432 (Stevenson 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

Stevenson v. State, 659 So. 2d 432, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 8527, 1995 WL 471663 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant complains that the sentence pronounced orally at the sentencing hearing provides that he shall serve his sentences concurrently, but that the written sentences are silent on this point. Section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes (1993), provides in pertinent part:

A defendant convicted of two or more offenses charged in the same indictment, information, or affidavit or in consolidated indictments, informations, or affidavits shall serve the sentences of imprisonment concurrently unless the court directs that two or more of the sentences be served consecutively.

Since appellant’s offenses were charged in the same information, and since the trial [433]*433court did not direct that appellant’s sentences be served consecutively, they are to be served concurrently. See also, Daniels v. State, 506 So.2d 1085 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) (where judgment does not state otherwise, defendant’s sentences on 24 counts are by law to be served concurrently).

We find no merit in the other point raised on appeal.

AFFIRMED.

PETERSON, C.J., and GOSHORN and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

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