PAUL DANIELS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1989-06-28
No. 88-1078
ERVIN, SHIVERS and JOANOS, JJ., concur.
545 So. 2d 504 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1989) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was sentenced as a habitual felony offender, pursuant to Section 775.-084, Florida Statutes (1987). However, the factual recitations justifying the enhanced sentence, specifically, that defendant was convicted of separate felonies on August 16, 1984, and December 14, 1983, are not supported by the record. The defendant pleaded nolo contendere and was convicted of lesser misdemeanor offenses. Therefore, we reverse and remand.

We observe, however, that appellant was convicted of a felony on December 2, 1982 —a period of time within five years of the commission of the instant offense. Whether the trial judge would still reach the same conclusion that defendant should be declared a habitual felony offender is impossible to determine from the record.

Accordingly, the sentence is REVERSED and the cause REMANDED for resentencing.

ERVIN, SHIVERS and JOANOS, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Daniels v. State, 593 So. 2d 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)
    …75.084(l)(a), Fla.Stat. (1985). Appellant appealed to this court, which reversed the sentence and remanded for re-sentencing because “the factual recitations justifying the enhanced sentence ... [were] not supported by the record.” Daniels v. State, 545 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). On remand, the trial court again found appellant to be an habitual felony offender; and again sentenced him to ten years in prison. However, in doing so, the trial court failed to make all of the specific findings of fact requ…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw