Legal Opinion

Sprankle v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided March 11, 1996No. 95-960PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

The public defender assigned to this case has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and appellant also has filed a pro se brief. We have reviewed the record in accordance with State v. Causey, 503 So.2d 321 (Fla.1987), and have found no reversible error apparent on the face of the record.

The public defender has pointed out several technical sentencing errors which must be corrected, although due to numerous concurrent sentences, the correction of these errors will not result in any practical benefit to appellant. While the court…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. State v. CauseySupreme Court of Florida · 1987
  3. Armstead v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1993

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Harris v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2001
  2. Adams v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2001
  3. Williams v. Secretary for the Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API