Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

JAMES WITT v. STATE OF FLORIDA, 16-3688 (2018)

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida Number: 16-3688 Visitors: 1
Filed: Jun. 08, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT JAMES WITT, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D16-3688 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) _) Opinion filed June 8, 2018. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Glenn T. Shelby, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Tosha Cohen, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Susan M. S
More
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT JAMES WITT, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D16-3688 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________) Opinion filed June 8, 2018. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Glenn T. Shelby, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Tosha Cohen, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Susan M. Shanahan, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee. SILBERMAN, Judge. James Witt appeals his sentences for two counts of tampering with a witness in a third-degree felony investigation which were imposed after revocation of probation. The written sentences designate Witt as a habitual felony offender (HFO) and as a violent felony offender of special concern (VFOSC). Witt filed a motion to correct sentencing error pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b), and the trial court determined that Witt was entitled to a resentencing hearing based on his sentence as an HFO and at which time the court would strike costs of prosecution over $100. The trial court denied Witt's challenge to his status as a VFOSC. The State points out in its brief that the record reflects that Witt withdrew his rule 3.800(b) motion in the trial court and that the resentencing hearing was cancelled. Therefore, we affirm Witt's sentences imposed after revocation of probation. Affirmed. KELLY and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur. -2-
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer