JAMES VALDES, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
JAMES VALDES, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
765 So. 2d 954
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2000)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We conclude that the consecutive habitual offender sentences were illegal and therefore reverse the final order denying the defendant’s postconviction motion. It is clear from the facts recited in the opinion on direct appeal that the defendant’s convictions for robbery and throwing a destructive device arose from the same criminal episode. See Valdes v. State, 443 So. 2d 223 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). Therefore, the habitual offender sentences for those offenses must be concurrent and not consecutive. See Valdes v. State, 765 So. 2d 774 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000).
DAVIS, BENTON and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jackson v. State, 825 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…he State argues the modification is lawful. We agree with Appellant and reverse and remand. HFO sentences for offenses occurring during the same criminal episode must run concurrently. Hale v. State, 630 So. 2d 521, 524 (Fla.1993); Valdes v. State, 765 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (stating consecutive HFO sentences for offenses [*1023] occurring during the same criminal episode are illegal.) Although a trial court may correct an illegal sentence at any time, Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(a); Moore v. State, 768 So…
-
Miller v. State, 772 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…sentence appellant to a life sentence under both the habitual felony offender and the prison releasee reoffender statute, however, we strike the habitual offender designation. See Walls v. State, 765 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Wright v. State, 765 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). AFFIRMED. BOOTH, MINER and KAHN, JJ., CONCUR.…
Authorities Cited
- Valdes v. State, 765 So. 2d 774 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- Valdes v. State, 443 So. 2d 223 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)