Taylor v. State

613 So. 2d 615, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 2257, 1993 WL 51788
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Taylor v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 558 So. 2d 1092
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 26, 1993·No. No. 92-00232·Published

Opinion

DANAHY, Acting Chief Judge.

The appellant, James Henry Taylor, challenges on three bases his conviction and sentence for attempted first degree murder. We find no merit in the issues raised concerning the definitions of specific and general intent in the jury instructions nor in the reclassification of this first degree felony to a life felony by reason of use of a firearm. We do find, however, that he was improperly adjudicated a habitual offender pursuant to section 775.084, Florida Statutes (1991). There were no findings made at the sentencing hearing that he met the criteria for habitual offender treatment and the trial court never adjudicated him to be a habitual offender. Thus it was error for the trial court to check off on the appellant’s sentencing form that he was adjudicated and sentenced as a habitual offender.

Although we affirm both the conviction and the sentence, we remand so that the trial court may correct the record to show that the appellant was not adjudicated or sentenced as a habitual offender. The appellant need not be present for this correction to his sentence.

CAMPBELL and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.

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

Taylor v. State, 613 So. 2d 615, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 2257, 1993 WL 51788 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

613 So. 2d 615 (Taylor v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.