# Brown v. State

> District Court of Appeal of Florida · December 28, 1994 · 647 So. 2d 333

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1137067

## Case

- **Court:** District Court of Appeal of Florida
- **Decided:** December 28, 1994
- **Citations:** 647 So. 2d 333; 1994 WL 715207
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Schwartz, C.J., and Nesbitt and Green
- **Cited by:** 5 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1137067

## Opinion text

647 So.2d 333 (1994)
Shaun BROWN, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 94-2067.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
December 28, 1994.
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Robert Kalter, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Linda S. Katz, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and NESBITT and GREEN, JJ.
ON CONFESSION OF ERROR
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from the resentencing which followed our decision in Brown v. State, 617 So.2d 1171 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). Because the offenses in question were committed during the same criminal transaction, it was error to impose consecutive rather than concurrent habitual offender sentences. Hale v. State, 630 So.2d 521 (Fla. 1993), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 115 S.Ct. 278 , 130 L.Ed.2d 195 (1994). The cause is remanded *334 for correction of the sentences accordingly. The defendant need not be present.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1137067. Public record. Not legal advice.