Williams v. State

Bruce H. Williams raises two issues in this direct appeal of his judgment of conviction and sentence. First, Mr. Williams asserts that the trial court erred in sentencing him as a habitual violent felony offender, because it was more than five years between his release on parole from his earlier conviction and the offense for which he was convicted in this case. The State concedes that the trial court erred in imposing this sentence.1

The second issue on appeal involves the admissibility of an in-court identification of the appellant by a witness for the State. Mr. Williams concedes that there…