Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

671 So. 2d 879

Merriman v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1996-04-17

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 1996

1 state decisions

Relies on 389 So. 2d 696 - Royal v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1996-04-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1We affirm defendant’s conviction. However, we have no alternative but to reverse the sentencing order and remand for reimposition of the original agreed twenty-four-year habitual offender sentence. There is no provision in the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure for a trial court’s subsequent enhancement of a legal sentence that it has imposed. Royal v. State, 389 So.2d 696, 697 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.800.

¶2Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded with directions.

/671/so2d/879 · .json · Public domain