From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Scott v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Dec 28, 1982
423 So. 2d 986 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Opinion

No. 81-2011.

December 28, 1982.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Maria M. Korvick, J.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and John H. Lipinski, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Jack Ludin, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before SCHWARTZ, BASKIN and FERGUSON, JJ.


Appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error in the trial proceedings, the judgments of conviction and sentence for burglary and theft are affirmed. The sentence was enhanced pursuant to Section 775.084(4), Florida Statutes (1979) and is supported only by the oral finding that "this is necessary for the protection of society", which finding is woefully short of what is required by the statute. Ruiz v. State, 407 So.2d 1042 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). We reverse the enhanced portion of the sentence and remand for further findings and resentencing in accordance with this opinion.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.


Summaries of

Scott v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Dec 28, 1982
423 So. 2d 986 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)
Case details for

Scott v. State

Case Details

Full title:DAVID SCOTT A/K/A DAVID SCOTT WILLIAMS, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Dec 28, 1982

Citations

423 So. 2d 986 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Citing Cases

Taylor v. State

The trial court's oral findings need not be reduced to writing and were otherwise sufficient. See Parker v.…

Rodriguez v. State

PER CURIAM. In identifying a defendant as an habitual offender for the purpose of an enhanced sentence, the…