Peterson v. State, 576 So. 2d 1385

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. However, as conceded by the state, we must remand for correction of the written sentencing order. As to Count II, the trial judge correctly stated that appellant‘s misdemeanor conviction could not be enhanced, but erroneously marked the habitual offender section. Upon remand, the sentencing order for Count II must be corrected to reflect that the special sentencing provision for habitual offender status does not apply to the misdemeanor offense. § 775.084(1)(a)2, Fla. Stat. (1989).

DOWNEY, GLICKSTEIN and GARRETT, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Peterson v. State

Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida

Date Published: Apr 10, 1991

Citations: 576 So. 2d 1385; 1991 WL 50140; 90-2068

Docket Number: 90-2068

Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.