LaFleur v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that because the defendant was sentenced as an habitual offender, he was not entitled to be resen-tenced even though his scoresheet was improperly calculated and the trial court sentenced him at the miscalculated maximum guideline sentence
• finding that because the defendant was sentenced as an habitual offender, he was not entitled to be resentenced even though his scoresheet was improperly calculated and the trial court sentenced him at the miscalculated maximum guideline sentence
• “While it seems more than coincidence that [the defendant] was sentenced to precisely [the minimum under the guidelines], the fact remains that, under the law, the sentence is not illegal and there is no basis for this court to vacate it.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Rankin v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2015-09-16· cited 14×
• Cooper v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2005-06-08· cited 14×
• Brian M. Rankin v. State of Florida
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2015-09-16
• Johnson v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2003-03-04
• Nathaniel Daily v. The State of Florida
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2024-05-08

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Green v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1992-08-27· cited 126×
• Horn v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2001-01-17· cited 11×
• Pandya v. Israel
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2000-06-07· cited 5×
• Parrish v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2001-03-14· cited 3×