From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Clark v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Sep 6, 2016
197 So. 3d 1290 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

Opinion

No. 1D15–2622.

09-06-2016

James M. CLARK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Terry P. Roberts, Law Office of Terry P. Roberts, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Samuel B. Steinberg, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.


Terry P. Roberts, Law Office of Terry P. Roberts, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Samuel B. Steinberg, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant raises two issues related to his conviction and one issue regarding his sentencing. We find only the claim related to appellant's sentencing has merit. The State concedes the trial court improperly designated appellant as an habitual felony offender, ignoring the jury's express finding that the State had failed to prove appellant's prior convictions. See Borrell v. State, 478 So.2d 1185 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985).

This finding was expressed in a special verdict form related to whether appellant violated section 794.0115, Florida Statutes (2013).

--------

Based upon the State's concession, we strike the habitual felony offender designation and remand for appellant to be resentenced.

WOLF, B.L. THOMAS, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Clark v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Sep 6, 2016
197 So. 3d 1290 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)
Case details for

Clark v. State

Case Details

Full title:James M. CLARK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Date published: Sep 6, 2016

Citations

197 So. 3d 1290 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)