Flowers v. State

Full title: Bryan FLOWERS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Date published: Feb 23, 2018

237 So. 3d 482 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)

Opinion

No. 1D17–3298

02-23-2018

Bryan FLOWERS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Bryan Flowers, pro se, Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

Bryan Flowers, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED . See Hamilton v. State , 996 So.2d 964, 966 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (rejecting defendant's claim that his sentence violates Hale v. State , 630 So.2d 521 (Fla. 1993), where, as here, the sentence "do[es] not, in the aggregate, exceed the maximum he could have received if all sentences subject to enhancement under the habitual felony offender statute had been enhanced (but run concurrently), and because his sentence[ ] also do[es] not, in the aggregate, exceed the maximum he could have received if none of his sentences had been enhanced but all had been ordered to run consecutively").

Wetherell, Rowe, and Jay, JJ., concur.