From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hardwick v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Jul 31, 1996
677 So. 2d 958 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

Opinion

No. 95-01255.

July 31, 1996.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Hillsborough County, M. William Graybill, J.

Richard Escobar, Tampa, for Appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Ron Napolitano, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.


The appellant, Otis Lee Hardwick, challenges the habitual violent felony offender sentence imposed following his jury conviction for robbery with a firearm. We agree with the appellant's argument that at sentencing the state failed to prove that he committed the robbery within five years of his release from prison for the enumerated felony necessary to qualify the appellant as a habitual violent felony offender. See Stephenson v. State, 666 So.2d 573 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). However, because the appellant never objected to the sufficiency of the state's proof to establish his eligibility to be treated as a habitual violent felony offender, the state shall have the opportunity on remand to supply the requisite proof. See Johnson v. State, 576 So.2d 916 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991).

Reversed and remanded for resentencing.

THREADGILL, C.J., and FRANK and LAZZARA, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Hardwick v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Jul 31, 1996
677 So. 2d 958 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)
Case details for

Hardwick v. State

Case Details

Full title:OTIS LEE HARDWICK, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Jul 31, 1996

Citations

677 So. 2d 958 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

Citing Cases

Riser v. State

Because Riser never objected to the sufficiency of the State's proof, the State is allowed on remand to…

Landreth v. State

On remand, the trial court may again sentence Landreth as a violent career criminal if he qualifies. See…