Pope v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 25, 1985

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1985-09-25

Relies on 462 So. 2d 452 - Walker v. State · 462 So. 2d 830 - McCuiston v. State · 465 So. 2d 535 - Rasul v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1985-09-25

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently March 2014

12 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

LEHAN, Judge.

¶1Defendant contends that his enhanced sentence as an habitual offender following his conviction for grand theft was erroneous because the trial court made no finding that the enhanced sentence was necessary to protect the public as required by section 775.04(3), Florida Statutes (1983). We agree. See Walker v. State, 462 So.2d 452 (Fla.1985); Brown v. State, 457 So.2d 1079 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984).

¶2We find no merit in defendant’s remaining contention. See Rasul v. State, 465 So.2d 535 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); McCuiston v. State, 462 So.2d 830 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).

¶3Reversed and remanded for resentenc-ing.

GRIMES, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.