Meehan v. State

Full title: JOHN MEEHAN, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Jun 29, 1988

526 So. 2d 1083 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

Opinion

No. 87-0907.

June 29, 1988.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Broward County; Mark E. Polen, Judge.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Tanja Ostapoff, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Georgina Jimenez-Orosa, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant's conviction but remand this cause for resentencing because of the trial court's failure to make a specific finding that enhanced sentencing under the habitual offender statute is necessary for the protection of the public and so state the factual predicate therefor. Upon resentencing, the trial court may again consider whether the habitual offender statute should be applied, and, in the event it is found to apply, the above-stated findings must be included in the sentencing order. See Hopkins v. State, 463 So.2d 521 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985).

ANSTEAD, GLICKSTEIN and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.