Prince v. State
Prince v. State
613 So. 2d 145; 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 2010; 1993 WL 36282
(Southern Reporter, Second Series)
Prince v. State
Opinion of the Court
We affirm appellant’s convictions but agree with appellant and the state that the trial court erred in imposing consecutive mandatory minimum sentences under the circumstances of this case. See Daniels v. State, 595 So.2d 952 (Fla. 1992). Accordingly, we remand with directions that the sentences be made concurrent.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.