Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

360 So. 2d 784

Brunicarde v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1978-05-17

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently May 1989

4 state decisions

Relies on Speller v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1978-05-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1After reviewing the briefs and record on appeal, we find the appellant has failed to demonstrate reversible error; therefore, the judgment appealed is affirmed.

¶2The only point which merits discussion is the propriety of the appellant’s sentence to confinement “at hard labor.” To be imprisoned “at hard labor” is improper because no existing state statute provides for its imposition as a sentence for any offense. Speller v. State, 305 So.2d 231 (Fla.2d DCA 1974).

¶3Remanded for the purpose of striking the language “at hard labor” from the sentencing order; otherwise affirmed. Appellant need not be present for this purpose.

HOBSON, Acting C. J., and SCHEB and DANAHY, JJ., concur.
/360/so2d/784 · .json · Public domain