Legal Opinion

Pittman v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 9, 1992No. 91-1022PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

DELL, Judge.

In Pittman v. State, 572 So.2d 29 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), this court reversed appellant’s sentence because the trial court failed to issue its sentencing order in compliance with Ree v. State, 565 So.2d 1329 (Fla.1990). On remand, we directed the trial court to sentence appellant within the guidelines in accordance with Pope v. State, 561 So.2d 554 (Fla.1990). Appellant now contends that the trial court erred upon resentencing because it used a recalculated scoresheet. He also contends that the judgment incorrectly specifies the degree of crime for certain offenses and incorrectly…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Pope v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1990
  2. Shull v. DuggerSupreme Court of Florida · 1987
  3. Ree v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1990
  4. State v. WhitfieldSupreme Court of Florida · 1986
  5. Herring v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Peters v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API