Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. John HINDENACH, Respondent.

SHAW, Justice.

We have for review Hindenach v. State, 708 So.2d 336 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), wherein the district court certified conflict with Mays v. State, 693 So.2d 52 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)( 4), Fla. Const.

We have since approved the district court decision in Mays. See Mays v. State, 717 So.2d 515, 23 Fla. L. Weekly S387 (Fla. 1998) (holding that under section 921.001(5), Florida Statutes (1995), if the "true" recommended guidelines sentence exceeds the statutory maximum, the guidelines sentence must be imposed). Accordingly, we quash Hindenach.

We decline to address the other issue raised by Hindenach since it was not the basis for our review.

It is so ordered.

HARDING, C.J., and OVERTON and WELLS, JJ., concur.

PARIENTE, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with an opinion, in which KOGAN and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.

PARIENTE, Justice, concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I concur in part and dissent in part for the reasons expressed in my opinion in Mays v. State, 717 So.2d 515, 23 Fla. L. Weekly S387, S387-89 (Fla. 1998) (Pariente, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).

KOGAN and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

STATE v. HINDENACH
(Oct 29, 1998)