Thompson v. State
591 So. 2d 1114, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 213, 1992 WL 581
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 3, 1992·No. No. 90-02876·Published·Cited by 3 cases
Opinion
We affirm the defendant’s conviction and sentence for violation of probation.
We need not and do not address defendant’s contention that he should not have been sentenced to probation after having been declared a habitual offender. The defendant did not object to that probationary sentence when it was imposed nor did he timely appeal that sentence thereafter. His acceptance of probation constituted a waiver of the right to attack that probation at revocation. See Wolfson v. State, 437 So.2d 174 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Thompson v. State, 591 So. 2d 1114, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 213, 1992 WL 581 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).
591 So. 2d 1114 (Thompson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Joyner v. State
594 So. 2d 328 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Lacourse v. State
593 So. 2d 619 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Swanson v. State
591 So. 2d 1114 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)