DERRICK HENDERSON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Credit For Time Served cases and more on FLexlaw
KLEIN, Judge.
The appellant, Derrick Henderson appeals from his sentence as a habitual offender. The state concedes that the trial court erred in sentencing Henderson as a habitual offender because the prior convictions upon which the trial court relied to impose habitual offender status all occurred on the same day; thus, failing to meet the requirements of section 775.084(5), Fla.Stat. (1993). We reverse and remand in order to allow the trial court to resentence the defendant based upon his entire record, including other prior convictions which could support habitualization. Doggett v. State, 584 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).
The state also concedes that the trial court erred in failing to give Henderson credit for time served on his two concurrent sentences in violation of Daniels v. State, 491 So. 2d 543 (Fla.1986). The error in jail time credit should be corrected in case number 93-3010CF to reflect the same credit which was given in case number 93-1999CF, specifically, credit for 260 days.
Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent herewith.
PARIENTE and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Speights v. State, 711 So. 2d 167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)…permit the state to introduce evidence of additional predicate offenses beyond those relied upon originally if a habitual offender sentence is overturned because it was based [*169] on non-sequential prior convictions); see also Henderson v. State, 651 So. 2d 822 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995).1 Thus, the alleged error herein does not satisfy the definition of an illegal sentence set forth in Callaway and Davis. We conclude that reliance on an improper predicate offense does not render the sentence “illegal” for purpos…
-
Lloyd v. State, 844 So. 2d 713 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…e simply entitled to a new sentencing hearing where the necessary evidence is presented and the correct law is applied. See Cameron v. State, 807 So. 2d 744 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Brown v. State, 701 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Henderson v. State, 651 So. 2d 822 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). See, e.g., Pelham v. State, 815 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Singleton v. State, 760 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Yankovski v. State, 785 So. 2d 1283 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001); see also Mann v. State, 453 So. 2d 784 (Fla.1984). T…
-
Carver v. State, 653 So. 2d 510 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)…g be awarded against the sentence eventually imposed. The sentences on the two cases run concurrently. In that situation, the defendant must be given credit on both sentences. Daniels v. State, 491 So. 2d 543 (Fla.1986). See also Henderson v. State, 651 So. 2d 822 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). Any other result would have the effect of depriving appellant of the credit that he is due under the statute. GLICKSTEIN, WARNER and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Daniels v. State, 491 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 1986)
- Doggett v. State, 584 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)