From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lifhred v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jun 3, 1992
598 So. 2d 335 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

Opinion

No. 90-1705.

June 3, 1992.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for St. Lucie County; Marc A. Cianca, Judge.

David M. Lamos, Fort Pierce, and E. Kent Mathews, Jensen Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Sarah B. Mayer, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.


We affirm the conviction and find only one error in the sentence, appellant having contended three to exist. Appellant correctly asserts that the trial court erred in multiplying the legal constraint factor on appellant's scoresheet by four, once for each offense at conviction. The supreme court recently disapproved of using a multiplier for calculating legal constraint points. Flowers v. State, 586 So.2d 1058, 1060 (Fla. 1991). Accordingly, we reverse the sentence and remand with direction to resentence in compliance with Flowers.

GLICKSTEIN, C.J., and ANSTEAD and POLEN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Lifhred v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jun 3, 1992
598 So. 2d 335 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)
Case details for

Lifhred v. State

Case Details

Full title:STEPHEN LIFHRED, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Jun 3, 1992

Citations

598 So. 2d 335 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

Citing Cases

Lifred v. State

In defendant's first appeal, the propriety of imposing consecutive mandatory minimums was briefed, argued and…