Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

710 So. 2d 1051

Docket No. 96-4821.

Davis v. State

Rufus Wayne DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1998-06-10

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently December 2008

5 state decisions

Relies on Light v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1998-06-10

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender; Raymond Dix, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

¶2Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General; Denise O. Simpson, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4In this direct appeal, Rufus W. Davis contends that the trial court committed reversible error regarding his convictions and sentences for burglary of a conveyance, grand theft and criminal mischief. We find his arguments with respect to the convictions without merit. Further, neither do we find reversible error regarding his sentences, because the record before us reflects that appellant was found to be a habitual felony offender only with regard to count 1 (burglary of a conveyance). Accordingly, the imposition of a term of probation for count 2 (grand theft) to run consecutively to the term of imprisonment imposed for count 1 is not *1052 erroneous. Compare Benjamin v. State,667 So.2d 437 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).

¶5AFFIRMED.

¶6BENTON, VAN NORTWICK and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.

/710/so2d/1051 · .json · Public domain