STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
BRIAN TULLIS WILLIAMS, RESPONDENT
STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
BRIAN TULLIS WILLIAMS, RESPONDENT
599 So. 2d 998
Florida Supreme Court (1992)
Negative Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
OVERTON, Justice.
We quash the decision of the district court in Williams v. State, 591 So. 2d 948 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), on the authority of State v. Barnes, 595 So. 2d 22 (Fla.1992),1 and remand for further proceedings consistent with our decision in Barnes.
It is so ordered.
SHAW, C.J., and McDONALD, BARKETT, GRIMES, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur. . The 1989 amendment to section 775.-084(l)(a)l, Florida Statutes (Supp.1988), did not change the plain meaning of the statute.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Watkins v. State, 622 So. 2d 1148 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…1335 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 581 So. 2d 1310 (Fla.1991). If the necessary predicate convictions are absent, a habitual felony offender sentence is illegal. Williams v. State, 591 So. 2d 948, 950 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), quashed on other grounds, 599 So. 2d 998 (Fla.1992). Moreover, no contemporaneous objection is required to appeal from an illegal sentence. Id. at 950. Finally, the fact that appellant agreed to accept a HVFO sentence does not preclude review, because if the sentence is determined illegal,…
-
Speights v. State, 711 So. 2d 167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)…is absent and that no contemporaneous objection is necessary to preserve the issue for appeal. See also Gahley v. State, 605 So. 2d 1309, 1310 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Williams v. State, 591 So. 2d 948, 950 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), quashed on other grounds, 599 So. 2d 998 (Fla.1992) (“Without the necessary predicate convictions appellant’s sentence as a habitual offender is illegal. No objection is required to raise the issue of an illegal sentence on direct appeal.”). In Washington v. State, 653 So. 2d 362, 367 (Fl…
-
Williams v. State, 602 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…PER CURIAM. In Williams v. State, 591 So. 2d 948 (Fla. 1st DCA1991), we reversed the trial court’s order which sentenced appellant as an habitual offender. The supreme court quashed our decision -in State v. Williams, 599 So. 2d 998 (Fla.1992). We have reviewed the issues raised by appellant, including the issue we did not previously address. We affirm the trial court on all issues. AFFIRMED. JOANOS, C.J., and BOOTH and SHIVERS, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Barnes, 595 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 1992)
- Williams v. State, 591 So. 2d 948 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)