Legal Opinion
Tunsil v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided May 17, 2006No. 3D06-884PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Per curiam
Affirmed. See Reese v. State, 899 So.2d 428 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (confirming that infirmity in notice of intent to seek enhanced sentence must be raised in a timely Rule 3.850 motion); Tunsil v. State, 797 So.2d 651, 653 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)(re-manding for resentencing as expressly ordered and stating “[defendant need not be present” for same).
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Reese v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2005
- Tunsil v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2001
3Cited by1 opinion
- Taylor v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2006