Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

647 So. 2d 904

Haynes v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided November 23, 1994

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1994-11-23

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently January 1998

3 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1994-11-23

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1We affirm in all respects except one. The State concedes the trial court erred in imposing consecutive sentences for count I and count III. Therefore, sentences for count I and III should run concurrently.

¶2Accordingly, we affirm the convictions and sentences, except for the State’s concession of sentencing error and remand to the trial court.

¶3AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.

GUNTHER and STEVENSON, JJ., and BARR, ROBBIE M., Associate Judge, concur.
/647/so2d/904 · .json · Public domain