JERMAINE DUHART, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
JERMAINE DUHART, APPELLANT,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
847 So. 2d 497
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2003)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
This Court’s opinion dated September 4, 2002, is withdrawn and substituted with the following opinion.
Based-on the State’s proper confession of error, the motion for rehearing is granted, the order denying post conviction relief is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court for a new sentencing proceeding, as the defendant was erroneously sentenced as a habitual violent felony offender and he must now be re-sentenced as a habitual offender. Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Duhart v. State, 858 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)…SHEVIN, Judge. We reverse the defendant’s sentence, imposed on remand from Duhart v. State, 847 So. 2d 497 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003). “Re-sentencing is a critical stage in which a defendant has the right to be present and has the right to have the assistance of counsel.” Waldo v. State, 781 So. 2d 1198, 1198 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); State v. Scott, 439 So. 2d 219, 2…
-
Duhart v. State, 930 So. 2d 654 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…f error, we reversed and remanded the case to the trial court “for a new sentencing proceeding, as the defendant was erroneously sentenced as a habitual violent felony offender and he must now be resentenced as a habitual offender.” Duhart v. State, 847 So. 2d 497, 497 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003). On remand, pursuant to our mandate, the trial court removed the “violent” designation and the minimum mandatory term from the appellant’s sentence. This “corrected order” was entered nunc pro tunc to the date of the appella…