Vernon v. State

677 So. 2d 403, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 7871, 1996 WL 417528
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 26, 1996·No. No. 95-00584·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Charlie Vernon’s appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), challenging his judgments and sentences for delivery and possession of cocaine. We find merit in his contention that the trial court erred in sentencing him as a habitual offender on the possession of cocaine offense. Under section 775.084(l)(a)3, Florida Statutes (1993), a defendant cannot receive a habitual offender sentence for possession of a controlled substance. See also Belton v. State, 673 So.2d 880 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).

We, therefore, remand this case to the trial court for resentencing on the possession of cocaine offense. We otherwise affirm the judgments and the habitual sentence for delivery of cocaine.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and BLUE and QUINCE, JJ., concur.

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

Vernon v. State, 677 So. 2d 403, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 7871, 1996 WL 417528 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

677 So. 2d 403 (Vernon v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Belton v. State
673 So. 2d 880 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)