WILLIE FRANK THOMAS, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
OVERTON, Justice.
We have before us Thomas v. State, 601 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992), in which the district court addressed the same question we recently answered in State v. Johnson, 616 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1993). The district court in its. order on rehearing reaffirmed Thomas’s sentence, citing cases pending in this Court that were subsequently disposed of by our decision in Johnson
In accordance with our decision in Johnson, we quash, in part, the decision of the district court in the instant case. Nevertheless, we approve Thomas’ sentence. The record reflects that none of the amendments to section 775.084, Florida Statutes, contained in chapter 89-280 affected Thomas’ sentence. Consequently, we approve the result of the district court’s decision because Thomas’ sentence is not altered by our decision in Johnson. We decline to address the other issues raised by Thomas.
It is so ordered.
BARRETT, C.J., and McDONALD, SHAW, GRIMES, ROGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur. . We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pearce v. State, 638 So. 2d 113 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…upon direct appeal and upon appeal from the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief. However, in accordance with State v. Johnson, 616 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1993), the supreme court quashed this court’s latter decision and remanded for resentencing, 617 So. 2d 1057. At resentencing, the trial court interpreted the supreme court’s opinion to only have reversed Pearce’s status as a habitual violent felony offender. Declaring that its previous findings with regard to Pearce’s habitual offender status were the la…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Johnson, 616 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1993)