Thompson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Thompson v. State

350 So. 2d 126, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 16459

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Thompson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 318 So. 2d 549 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 30, 1977·No. No. 77-515·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

After reviewing the briefs and record on appeal, we find the appellant has failed to demonstrate any reversible error; therefore, the judgment appealed is affirmed. The judgment and sentence of the court, while indicating the appellant was to receive credit for all time served in jail, does not specifically set forth the period of credit time to be allowed as required by Section 921.161(1) Florida Statutes. Smith v. State, 310 So.2d 770 (Fla.2d DCA 1975).

Remanded for correction of the sentence; otherwise affirmed. Appellant need not be present for this purpose.

BOARDMAN, C. J., and GRIMES and SCHEB, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

After reviewing the briefs and record on appeal, we find the appellant has failed to demonstrate any reversible error; therefore, the judgment appealed is affirmed. The judgment and sentence of the court, while indicating the appellant was to receive credit for all time served in jail, does not specifically set forth the period of credit time to be allowed as required by Section 921.161(1) Florida Statutes. Smith v. State, 310 So.2d 770 (Fla.2d DCA 1975).

Remanded for correction of the sentence; otherwise affirmed. Appellant need not be present for this purpose.

BOARDMAN, C. J., and GRIMES and SCHEB, JJ., concur.

Thompson v. State, 350 So. 2d 126, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 16459 (Fla. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

350 So. 2d 126 (Thompson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related