Legal Opinion

Pizano v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided November 6, 2002No. 4D02-2711PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

We reverse the trial court’s order denying Appellant’s rule 3.800(a) motion to correct an illegal sentence. Appellant is entitled to re-sentencing under the 1994 guidelines pursuant to Heggs v. State, 759 So.2d 620 (Fla.2000).

Appellant was convicted of burglary of a dwelling and sentenced under the 1995 guidelines to 48 months in prison. Appellant’s offense, which was committed November 6, 1995, is within the window period. See Trapp v. State, 760 So.2d 924, 928 (Fla.2000). He alleges that under the 1994 guidelines, the permissible sentencing range is 19.8 to 33 months. The sentence he…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Heggs v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2000
  2. Trapp v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2000
  3. Edwards v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2000
  4. Prado v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2000

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Matthews v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API