From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Klarich v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
Jun 15, 2000
760 So. 2d 150 (Fla. 2000)

Opinion

No. SC95705.

Opinion filed June 15, 2000.

Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal; Direct Conflict, Fifth District; Case No. 5D98-172, (Volusia County)

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Susan A. Fagan, Assistant Public Defender, Seventh Judicial Circuit, Daytona Beach, Florida, for Petitioner.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Belle B. Schumann, Wesley Heidt, and Kellie A. Nielan, Assistant Attorneys General, Daytona Beach, Florida, for Respondent.


We have for review Klarich v. State, 730 So.2d 419 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), a decision of the Fifth District Court of Appeal that cited as controlling authority Maddox v. State, 708 So.2d 617 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), approved in part, disapproved in part, 25 Fla. L. Weekly S367 (Fla. May 11, 2000). We have jurisdiction.See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.; Jollie v. State, 405 So.2d 418, 420 (Fla. 1981). For the reasons expressed in our opinion inMaddox v. State, 25 Fla. L. Weekly S367 (Fla. May 11, 2000), we approve the decision below and find that the unpreserved sentencing errors in this case do not constitute fundamental error.

It is so ordered.

HARDING, C.J., and SHAW, WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Klarich v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
Jun 15, 2000
760 So. 2d 150 (Fla. 2000)
Case details for

Klarich v. State

Case Details

Full title:STEPHEN J. KLARICH, JR., Petitioner, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of Florida

Date published: Jun 15, 2000

Citations

760 So. 2d 150 (Fla. 2000)

Citing Cases

Britt v. State

Appellant did not raise the first issue in the trial court. Therefore, it has not been preserved. It does not…