Valdez v. State, 696 So. 2d 958

PER CURIAM.

Based upon our recent decision in Richardson v. State, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D1498, — So.2d - [1997 WL 325600] (Fla. 1st DCA June 17, 1997) (criminal division en banc), we affirm the denial of appellant’s motion seeking postconviction 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 (Fla.1993), ILLEGAL WITHIN THE MEANING OF RULE 3.800(a), WHEN NO SINGLE SENTENCE EXCEEDS THE STATUTORY MAXIMUM PROVIDED BY LAW?

AFFIRMED.

ALLEN, WEBSTER and MICKLE, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Valdez v. State

Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida

Date Published: Jul 16, 1997

Citations: 696 So. 2d 958; 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 8179; 1997 WL 395257; No. 96-4942

Docket Number: No. 96-4942

Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.