Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Slade v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided March 2, 2005No. 4D03-2733Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partTaylor, J.

I agree that appellant’s conviction for resisting an officer with violence and battery on a law enforcement officer should be affirmed. However, I would reverse appellant’s habitual felony offender sentence, because as the state concedes, the state failed to admit into evidence certified copies of appellant’s prior convictions and the court files relied upon by the court in determining that appellant qualified as a habitual felony offender. See Osborne v. State, 820 So.2d 1046, 1047-48 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Mitchell v. State, 780 So.2d 282, 283 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001).

I interpret Osborne as…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Mitchell v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2001
  2. Osborne v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API