SIEFFE JOE AWAD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
SIEFFE JOE AWAD, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
364 So. 2d 516
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1978)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The appellant was convicted on two counts of unlawful delivery of two controlled substances, hashish and pethidine, in violation of Section 893.13(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1977). The trial court imposed a general sentence of two and one-half years. Under Dorfman v. State, 351 So. 2d 954 (Fla.1977), this was error. Separate sentences for each offense must be imposed. Accordingly, this cause is reversed for resentencing at which the appellant need not be present unless required by the trial court.
ANSTEAD, LETTS and MOORE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brazley v. State, 871 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)…neral sentence, vacate the entire sentence and remand to the trial court for resentencing, with instructions to enter a distinct and individual sentence for each felony conviction.2 Brazley does not need to be present at resentencing. Awad v. State, 364 So. 2d 516 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)(at resentencing necessitated by the trial court’s error in imposing a general sentence, it is not necessary that the defendant be present unless the trial court requires it). . Counts II through VI remained as charged. . Notwit…
-
Kissel v. State, 757 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…ence” is now “illegal” under Mancino. We therefore affirm the trial court’s order on defendant’s first three points, but we reverse and remand with directions to re-sentence defendant. The defendant does not need to be present. See Awad v. State, 364 So. 2d 516 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978) (at re-sentencing necessitated by trial court’s error in imposing a general sentence following conviction of two offénses, it is not necessary for defendant to be present). AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED and REMANDED in part for re…
-
Durbrow v. State, 12 So. 3d 817 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…for Mr. Durbrow to be resentenced once again. We note that a defendant need not always be present at a resentencing hearing that is intended to correct a general sentence. See Brazley v. State, 871 So. 2d 986, 987 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004); Awad v. State, 364 So. 2d 516, 516 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). Nevertheless, in light of the unusual circumstances arising in this case, we require that Mr. Durbrow shall be entitled to be present and represented by counsel at the resentencing hearing. Mr. Durbrow should be resentenced…
Authorities Cited
- Dorfman v. State, 351 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 1977)