Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

573 So. 2d 209

Docket No. 90-1974.

Collazo v. State

Pedro COLLAZO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 29, 1991.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1991-01-29

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently March 1992

4 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“Appellant was sentenced as a habitual offender based on two prior felony convictions. Appellant contends, and the state concedes, that the sentence was improper because the two prior convictions arose out of the same criminal episode, and were entered on the same day. We agree. Convictions entered on the same date, and arising from the same criminal episode, are treated as a single offense. Walker v. State, 567 So.2d 546 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Taylor v. State, 558 So.2d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Lawley v. State, 556 So.2d 430 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Shead v. State, 367 So.2d 264 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 576 So. 2d 758 - Barnes v. State

“Convictions entered on the same date, arising from the same criminal episode, are treated as a single offense.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 576 So. 2d 758 - Barnes v. State

Relies on Shead v. State · Walker v. State · 558 So. 2d 1092 - Taylor v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1991-01-29

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Louis Campbell, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

¶2Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Jorge Espinosa, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

¶3Before NESBITT, JORGENSON and GERSTEN, JJ.

¶4

CONFESSION OF ERROR

¶5PER CURIAM.

¶6Appellant, Pedro Collazo, appeals his sentence entered pursuant to the habitual offender statute, section 775.084, Florida Statutes (1989). We reverse and remand.

¶7Appellant was sentenced as a habitual offender based on two prior felony convictions. Appellant contends, and the State concedes, that the sentence was improper because the two prior convictions arose out of the same criminal episode, and were entered on the same day.

¶8We agree. Convictions entered on the same date, arising from the same criminal episode, are treated as a single offense. Walker v. State, 567 So.2d 546 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Taylor v. State, 558 So.2d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Lawley v. State, 556 So.2d 430 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Shead v. State, 367 So.2d 264 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).

¶9Accordingly, we reverse and remand for resentencing.

/573/so2d/209 · .json · Public domain