JAMES BELL, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1996-09-20
No. 95-00690
PATTERSON, A.C.J., and SCHEB, JOHN M., Senior Judge, concur.
679 So. 2d 1275 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1996) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Topics
Concurrent Vs. Consecutive Sentences Habitual Violent Felony Offender Consecutive Sentences Sentencing

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Concurrent Vs. Consecutive Sentences cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
WHATLEY, Judge.

WHATLEY, Judge.

The appellant, James Bell, challenges Ms convictions and sentences for possession of cocaine and sale of cocaine. We find merit only in Ms contention that the trial court erred in imposing consecutive habitualized sentences.

Bell was sentenced as a habitual violent felony offender. He correctly argues that the trial court erred in imposing the sentence for possession of cocaine to run consecutively to the sentence for sale of cocaine. A trial court may not both enhance a defendant’s sentence as a habitual offender and order each of the enhanced habitual offender sentences for the possession and the sale of the same identical piece of cocaine to run consecutively to one another. Hale v. State, 630 So. 2d 521 (Fla.1993), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 278, 130 L.Ed.2d 195 (1994). Accordingly, we reverse the sentences and remand this case with instructions that Bell’s enhanced sentences be ordered to run concurrently. Bell need not be present at re-sentencing. See Brown v. State, 630 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded for resentencing.

PATTERSON, A.C.J., and SCHEB, JOHN M., Senior Judge, concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Windisch v. State, 709 So. 2d 606 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)
    …mply order the previously imposed sentences to run concurrently. In reviewing Hale sentencing errors, this court has consistently applied the Hale instruction and remanded with directions to run the imposed sentences concurrently. See Bell v. State, 679 So. 2d 1275 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Golz v. State, 674 So. 2d 856 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Rolle v. State, 668 So. 2d 1080 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Brown v. State, 630 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). See also Brown v. State, 647 So. 2d 333 (Fla. 3d DCA [*607] 1994); Suggs v.…
  • Ortiz v. State, 740 So. 2d 598 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Windisch v. State, 709 So. 2d 606 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998); Bell v. State, 679 So. 2d 1275 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Brown v. State, 647 So. 2d 333 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994).…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw