CHARLES S. ZITO, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
CHARLES S. ZITO, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
682 So. 2d 675
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1996)
Caution
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the trial court’s denial of appellant’s Rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. However, as in Freeman v. State, 679 So. 2d 364 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), we certify to the supreme court the following question as-oné of great public importance:
IS STATE V. GRAY, 654 So. 2d 552 (Fla.1995) RETROACTIVE?
AFFIRMED.
DELL, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Moore v. State, 768 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…tion or rule 3.800(b) motion, it could have been presented on direct appeal.2 Failure to order a presentence investigation as required by section 775.084(3)(a)l is an error that has been corrected on direct appeal in other cases. See Burns v. State, 682 So. 2d 675 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Bardwell v. State, 617 So. 2d 431 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). The defendant’s waiver of the right to pursue these remedies in the trial court and on direct appeal is a procedural default that serves as a bar to consideration of the iss…
-
Barton v. State, 706 So. 2d 399 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)…abitual offender sentence. The record shows that the trial court did not have a presentence investigation report as required by section 775.0849(3)(a)l, Florida Statutes (1995), before sentencing the appellant. Based on this and on Burns v. State, 682 So. 2d 675 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), and Bardwell v. State, 617 So. 2d 431 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), the State concedes the error. [*400] We find the State too quick to concede based on the particular facts of this case. Because the appellant bargained for a habitual of…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Collin Gray, 654 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 1995)
- Freeman v. State, 679 So. 2d 364 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)