Toole v. State

865 So. 2d 629, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 1158, 2004 WL 221056
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 6, 2004·No. No. 1D03-3891·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of the appellant’s motion to vacate sentence. See Pitts v. State, 855 So.2d 681 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003); State v. Franklin, 836 So.2d 1112 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003). We certify conflict with Taylor v. State, 818 So.2d 544 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), review dismissed, 821 So.2d 302 (Fla.2002).

AFFIRMED.

BARFIELD, KAHN, and HAWKES, JJ., concur.

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

Toole v. State, 865 So. 2d 629, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 1158, 2004 WL 221056 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

865 So. 2d 629 (Toole v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Taylor v. State
818 So. 2d 544 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
State v. Franklin
836 So. 2d 1112 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)
Pitts v. State
855 So. 2d 681 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)