Legal Opinion

Smith v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 10, 1993No. 92-2249PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

We find no reversible error in this ease. However, the special provisions page of the sentence appealed should be corrected to show Smith is to serve his minimum mandatory three year sentence pursuant to section 893.13(1)(e)(1) rather than section 893.135(1)(b), as it presently states. See Green v. State, 619 So.2d 36 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Surratt v. State, 605 So.2d 177 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); Griffin v. State, 565 So.2d 918 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Heath v. State, 548 So.2d 1183 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Davis v. State, 529 So.2d 1251 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988).

We remand for correction of this clerical error.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Davis v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1988
  2. Green v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1993
  3. Surratt v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992
  4. Griffin v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990
  5. Heath v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Mills v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API