Legal Opinion

Kilpatrick v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided July 21, 1993No. 92-00176PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Appellant challenges his sentences for robbery without a gun, aggravated assault and grand theft. We affirm appellant’s sentences as a habitual offender based on *1033King v. State, 597 So.2d 309 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. denied, 602 So.2d 942 (Fla.1992). We do remand, however, for appellant’s sentence to be amended to reflect proper credit for time served as required by Tripp v. State, 622 So.2d 941, (Fla.1993).

FRANK, C.J., and RYDER and CAMPBELL, JJ., concur.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Tripp v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1993
  2. King v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Duncan v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1996