Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2002

Hart v. State

Hart v. State
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided March 13, 2002 · Green, Nesbitt, Shevin
811 So. 2d 785; 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 3043; 2002 WL 384517 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Hart v. State

Opinion of the Court

.PER CURIAM.

We reverse the order denying defendant’s Rule 3.800 motion. Defendant contends that he does not have the requisite convictions to qualify him as a habitual violent felony offender. The record fails to show that defendant is not entitled to relief. The court did not attach the certified judgment of a qualifying conviction. Accordingly, we reverse the order and remand for the necessary attachment or an evidentiary hearing.1 See Thomas v. State, 642 So.2d 673 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994).

Reversed and remanded.

. The resolution of this issue notwithstanding, the state correctly concedes that the habitual violent felony offender sentence imposed must be vacated as it exceeds a permissible sentence for a third degree felony,

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.

↑