No. 96-3316 | Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Jul 16, 1997
Based upon our recent decision in Richardson v. State, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D1498, - So.2d - [1997 WL 325600" date_filed="1997-06-17" court="Fla. Dist. Ct. App." case_name="Richardson v. State">1997 WL 325600] (Fla. 1st DCA June 17, 1997) (criminal division en banc), we affirm the denial of appellant’s motion seeking post-conviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). As in Richardson, we certify to the supreme court the following question:
ARE CONSECUTIVE HABITUAL FELONY OFFENDER SENTENCES FOR MULTIPLE OFFENSES ARISING FROM A SINGLE CRIMINAL EPISODE, PROSCRIBED BY HALE V. STATE, 630 So. 2d 521" date_filed="1993-10-14" court="Fla." case_name="Hale v. State">630 So.2d 521 (Fla.1993), ILLEGAL WITHIN THE MEANING OF RULE 3.800(a), WHEN NO SINGLE SENTENCE EXCEEDS THE STATUTORY MAXIMUM PROVIDED BY LAW?
AFFIRMED.