Legal Opinion

Goene v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided November 22, 1989No. 88-1822PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

We affirm the defendant’s conviction without discussion. We also affirm the defendant’s resentence and reject his argument that the trial court erred in vacating his original sentence and resentencing him to a greater sentence after learning that appellant had misrepresented his identity and criminal record at the original sentencing hearing. See State v. Burton, 314 So.2d 136 (Fla.1975); United States v. Di-*338Francesco, 449 U.S. 117, 101 S.Ct. 426, 66 L.Ed.2d 328 (1980); and United States v. Bishop, 774 F.2d 771 (7th Cir.1985).

Nevertheless, we certify the following question to the Florida…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. DiFrancescoSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  2. United States v. Robert F. BishopCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
  3. State v. BurtonSupreme Court of Florida · 1975
  4. Katz v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1976
  5. Doe v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1986

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Goene v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1991
  2. Graham v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API