Legal Opinion

Ferris v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided October 15, 2010No. 1D10-2946PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

The appellant challenges the denial of a motion to correct illegal sentence. For the reasons discussed below, we reverse.

The appellant was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment on count one as both a PRR and an HVFO. A trial court cannot impose equal concurrent PRR and HVFO sentences. See Grant v. State, 770 So.2d 655 (Fla.2000); Hankins v. State, 886 So.2d 1026 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (“Under the holding in Grant, [the defendant] can receive both enhancements to his sentence so long as the habitual offender designation is longer than, not equal to or shorter than, the term required as a prison…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Grant v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2000
  2. Hankins v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2004
  3. Rule v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2009

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Ferris v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2012
  2. TAJHON BODERICK WILSON v. STATE OF FLORIDADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API