Matthews v. State
Matthews v. State
795 So. 2d 268; 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 13725; 2001 WL 1159580
(Southern Reporter, Second Series)
Matthews v. State
Opinion of the Court
The appellant challenges habitual offender sentences which were imposed for three offenses, with the sentences being made consecutive to each other. The record establishes that the offenses occurred during a single criminal episode. As the state concedes, Hale v. State, 630 So.2d 521 (Fla. 1993), prohibits such consecutive sentencing in these circumstances. The challenged sentences are therefore vacated, and the case is remanded for resen-tencing.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.