¶1None of the grounds asserted by the defendant for reversal of his conviction present either error or harm. See M.H. v. State, 538 So.2d 1389 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). We remand the cause, however, to the trial court for the purposes (a) of correcting the judgment so as accurately to reflect the offense of which the appellant was found guilty and (b) of making the required written findings in support of the determination that Stanley is an habitual offender. See Link v. State, 537 So.2d 696 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).
538 So. 2d 1390
538 So.2d 1390
14 Fla.L.Weekly 678
Stanley v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided March 14, 1989
District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1989-03-14
Relies on Link v. State · 538 So. 2d 1389 - M.H. v. State
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1989-03-14
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently May 2017
11 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 →