Zink v. State
| Decision Date | 02 March 2007 |
| Docket Number | No. 2D05-3644.,2D05-3644. |
| Citation | 951 So.2d 34 |
| Parties | Jesse ZINK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Megan Olson, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Tonja Rene Vickers, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.
Jesse Zink challenges his conviction for robbery and his sentence as a violent career criminal to thirty years in prison. We affirm Zink's conviction without comment and write to explain why we disagree with the State's concession of error on the sentencing issue.
Zink maintains that the trial court erred by imposing a violent career criminal sentence because the State failed to prove that he had the requisite number of prior convictions. To qualify for sentencing as a violent career criminal, a defendant must have three or more qualifying convictions. § 775.084(1)(d), Fla. Stat. (2002). Qualifying convictions can include any forcible felony, as described in section 776.08, or escape. § 775.084(1)(d)(1)(a), (f). At sentencing, the State introduced a 2003 judgment that included a conviction for robbery, two 1990 judgments with convictions for robbery and escape, and a 1987 judgment with a burglary conviction.
The 1990 judgments were entered on the same day and by the same judge, who imposed concurrent sentences. At the sentencing hearing in the instant case, defense counsel objected to the court's treatment of these convictions as separate qualifying offenses. See § 775.084(5) (); see also Bover v. State, 797 So.2d 1246, 1250 (Fla. 2001) ().
At the sentencing hearing, the prosecutor argued that the qualifying convictions did not have to be sequential. On appeal, however, the State acknowledges this requirement, and it concedes error because the 1990 judgments appear to constitute only a single qualifying conviction. In conceding that a reversal is warranted, however, the State has overlooked the 1987 burglary...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Haley v. State
...891 So.2d 479 (Fla.2004); Young v. State, 739 So.2d 553 (Fla.1999); Hughes v. State, 22 So.3d 132 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Zink v. State, 951 So.2d 34 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007); Tillman v. State, 900 So.2d 633 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Brown v. State, 827 So.2d 1054 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Shaw v. State, 780 So.......
-
Wakefield v. State, 2D13–2099.
...v. State, 739 So.2d 553 (Fla.1999); Tillman v. State, 609 So.2d 1295 (Fla.1992); Eutsey v. State, 383 So.2d 219 (Fla.1980); Zink v. State, 951 So.2d 34 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007); Bizzell v. State, 912 So.2d 386 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Spikes v. State, 851 So.2d 252 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003); Thomas v. State,......
-
Wakefield v. State, 2D13–2322.
...State, 739 So.2d 553 (Fla.1999); Tillman v. State, 609 So.2d 1295 (Fla.1992); Eutsey v. State, 383 So.2d 219 (Fla.1980); Zink v. State, 951 So.2d 34 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007); Bizzell v. State, 912 So.2d 386 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Spikes v. State, 851 So.2d 252 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003); Thomas v. State, 77......
-
Miller v. State
...So.2d 553 (Fla.1999); Hughes v. State, 22 So.3d 132 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Waiter v. State, 965 So.2d 861 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007); Zink v. State, 951 So.2d 34 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007); Nedd v. State, 855 So.2d 664 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Curi v. State, 36 So.3d 853 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010); Ubilla v. State, 8 So.3......