Rahming v. State, 616 So. 2d 1232

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s sentences, except we reverse the imposition of the consecutive mandatory minimum sentences and remand for resentencing in accordance with this opinion. Because appellant’s offenses occurred during a single, continuous criminal episode, consecutive mandatory minimum sentences were improper. Palmer v. State, 438 So.2d 1 (Fla.1983); Cox v. State, 605 So.2d 978 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED.

GLICKSTEIN, C.J., GUNTHER, J., and WALDEN, JAMES H., Senior Judge, concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Rahming v. State

Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida

Date Published: May 5, 1993

Citations: 616 So. 2d 1232; 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4997; 1993 WL 140112; No. 92-2204

Docket Number: No. 92-2204

Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.