Moreno v. State, No. 88-2181
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
| Writing for the Court | Before SCHWARTZ; PER CURIAM |
| Citation | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2501,550 So.2d 1172 |
| Docket Number | No. 88-2181 |
| Decision Date | 24 October 1989 |
| Parties | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2501 Rolando MORENO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
Page 1172
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Third District.
Maria Brea Lipinski and John H. Lipinski, Miami, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Ivy R. Ginsberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HUBBART and JORGENSON, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal by the defendant Rolando Moreno from judgments of conviction and sentences for unlawful possession of cocaine and unlawful possession of drug paraphernalia. The sole point on appeal is that the trial court erred in enhancing the defendant's sentence under the Habitual Felony Offender Statute [ § 775.084, Fla.Stat. (1987) ] because the trial court failed to make specific findings of fact which show on their face that an extended prison term is necessary to protect the public from the defendant's further criminal conduct. We entirely agree; indeed, the state confesses error on this point. Eutsey v. State, 383 So.2d 219 (Fla.1980); § 775.084(3)(d), Fla.Stat. (1987). Contrary to the defendant's contention, however, the trial court upon remand may orally make the requisite findings of fact in open court on the record; such findings need not be reduced to writing. Parker v. State, 546 So.2d 727 (Fla.1989); contra Rodriguez v. State, 542 So.2d 1064 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (implicit ly overruled by Parker ).
The final judgments of conviction under review are affirmed; the sentences under review are reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court for resentencing in accord with the views expressed in this opinion.
Page 1173
Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hierro v. State, No. 90-2098
...729 (Fla.1989); Eutsey v. State, 383 So.2d at 226; Tibbetts v. State, 603 So.2d Page 916 43, 45 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Moreno v. State, 550 So.2d 1172 (Fla. 3d DCA We find no error in the trial court's evidentiary rulings regarding the restraining order. For the reasons stated, the conviction......
-
Power v. State, No. 89-1548
...make the factual findings required by section 775.084, Florida Statutes, we must vacate the habitual offender sentence. Moreno v. State, 550 So.2d 1172 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Although the 1989 version of the habitual offender statute no longer requires that the trial court find that a defendan......
-
Chang v. State, No. 89-1645
...BARKDULL, JORGENSON and LEVY, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See and compare Parker v. State, 546 So.2d 727 (Fla.1989); Moreno v. State, 550 So.2d 1172 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Bohannon v. State, 546 So.2d 1081 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Section 775.084, Florida Statutes...
-
Pinacle v. State, No. 90-64
...1 to make specific findings of fact showing that an enhanced prison term is required for the protection of the public. Moreno v. State, 550 So.2d 1172 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). The cause is remanded for resentencing in accordance with Moreno. There is no merit in the appellant's other contentions......
-
Hierro v. State, No. 90-2098
...729 (Fla.1989); Eutsey v. State, 383 So.2d at 226; Tibbetts v. State, 603 So.2d Page 916 43, 45 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Moreno v. State, 550 So.2d 1172 (Fla. 3d DCA We find no error in the trial court's evidentiary rulings regarding the restraining order. For the reasons stated, the conviction......
-
Power v. State, No. 89-1548
...make the factual findings required by section 775.084, Florida Statutes, we must vacate the habitual offender sentence. Moreno v. State, 550 So.2d 1172 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Although the 1989 version of the habitual offender statute no longer requires that the trial court find that a defendan......
-
Chang v. State, No. 89-1645
...BARKDULL, JORGENSON and LEVY, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See and compare Parker v. State, 546 So.2d 727 (Fla.1989); Moreno v. State, 550 So.2d 1172 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Bohannon v. State, 546 So.2d 1081 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Section 775.084, Florida Statutes...
-
Pinacle v. State, No. 90-64
...1 to make specific findings of fact showing that an enhanced prison term is required for the protection of the public. Moreno v. State, 550 So.2d 1172 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). The cause is remanded for resentencing in accordance with Moreno. There is no merit in the appellant's other contentions......