JORDAN v. STATE (2000)

District Court of Appeal of Florida,First District.

Michael Scott JORDAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D98-2701.

Decided: April 12, 2000

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Jamie Spivey, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Sherri T. Rollinson, Assistant Attorney General, for Appellee.

The trial court sentenced the defendant as a habitual felony offender to thirty years in prison for burglary of a dwelling and to ten years each on four counts of grand theft. The sentences imposed on the grand theft charges are concurrent with each other but consecutive to the burglary sentence. All of the charges arose out of the same criminal episode.

We affirm the convictions, but pursuant to Hale v. State, 630 So.2d 521 (Fla.1993), we reverse the sentences and remand the case to the trial court. As the court explained in Hale, the habitual felony offender statute does not authorize consecutive habitual felony offender sentences for crimes arising out of a single criminal episode. Although the defendant did not object at the time of sentencing or subsequently file a rule 3.800(b) motion in the trial court, we may review his sentence on direct appeal because it is “illegal”. See Lipford v. State, 736 So.2d 62 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999).

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

PER CURIAM.

JOANOS, WEBSTER and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network