Legal Opinion

Wilken v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 28, 1988No. 87-2569PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GLICKSTEIN, Judge.

We first remand for housekeeping corrections; namely, to have the forms used by the trial court accurately reflect appellant did not plead nolo contendere, but was found guilty by a jury of Count III of the information; to strike any references to community control as to Count III; and to strike reference to assessment of costs, as they were not assessed.

Substantively, we remand for resentenc-ing because we agree with appellant’s counsel that his client does not meet the statutory requirements for habitual misde-meanant. Section 775.084(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1987),…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Joyner v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1947
  2. Shead v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1979
  3. Snowden v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984
  4. State v. SnowdenSupreme Court of Florida · 1985
  5. Lovett v. CochranSupreme Court of Florida · 1962

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Barnes v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991
  2. Mitz v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991

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

Powered by the Exa API