Legal Opinion

Bell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 22, 1999No. 97-2498PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

We affirm Bell’s consecutive burglary sentences. The consecutive sentences for burglaries of two neighboring houses within several minutes of each other do not violate the prohibition against consecutive habitual offender sentences for crimes arising out of the same criminal episode as set forth in Hale v. State, 630 So.2d 521 (Fla.1993). See Arroyo v. State, 704 So.2d 655 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)(affirming consecutive habitual offender sentences for two sales of cocaine rocks to two different police officers within fifteen minutes); Sprow v. State, 639 So.2d 992 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)(consecutive…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hale v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1993
  2. Sprow v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1994
  3. Arroyo v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1997

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Selby v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2000

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

Powered by the Exa API