DENNIS W. BRUNICARDE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
DENNIS W. BRUNICARDE, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
360 So. 2d 784
Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1978)
Negative Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
After reviewing the briefs and record on appeal, we find the appellant has failed to demonstrate reversible error; therefore, the judgment appealed is affirmed.
The only point which merits discussion is the propriety of the appellant’s sentence to confinement “at hard labor.” To be imprisoned “at hard labor” is improper because no existing state statute provides for its imposition as a sentence for any offense. Speller v. State, 305 So. 2d 231 (Fla.2d DCA 1974).
Remanded for the purpose of striking the language “at hard labor” from the sentencing order; otherwise affirmed. Appellant need not be present for this purpose.
HOBSON, Acting C. J., and SCHEB and DANAHY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Kohl v. BAY Colony Club Condo., Inc., 385 So. 2d 1028 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)…he question then becomes whether a determination that plaintiffs have standing to pursue a class action is such a non-final order as will support an interlocutory appeal. We answered this question in the negative in Atreco-Florida, Inc. v. Berliner, 360 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). The fifth district followed our lead in American Heritage Institutional Securities, Inc. v. Price, 379 So. 2d 420 (1980) (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). We propose to revisit the question. The substantive right of a condominium associatio…
-
Gen. Dev. Corp. v. Stanislaus, 544 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…a.1988). But see Kohl v. Bay Colony Club Condominium, Inc., 385 So. 2d 1028 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980) (wherein a three judge panel, without benefit of an en banc hearing, disapproved the prior decision of its own court in Atreco-Florida, Inc. v. Berliner, 360 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 366 So. 2d 879 (Fla.1978), and held that a non-final order certifying a plaintiff class is an appealable order because it determines jurisdiction over the person). Neither do we find this order to be reviewable by comm…
-
Am. Heritage Institutional Sec., Inc. v. Price, 379 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)…ced former Appellate Rule 4.2. It no longer has the general category of matters formerly cognizable in equity. Under Rule 9.130 we do not have jurisdiction to consider the interlocutory orders raised in this appeal. Atreco-Florida, Inc. v. Berliner, 360 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978), cert. denied, 366 So. 2d 879 (Fla.1978). Accordingly, the Motion to Dismiss the appeal is granted, and the appeal is hereby dismissed. DAUKSCH, C. J., and COBB, J., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Speller v. State, 305 So. 2d 231 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974)