Case ID: so2d_475/html/1021-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "LEHAN, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Dennis L. POPE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 84-2650.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    Sept. 25, 1985.
    James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and William H. Pasch, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.
    Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Gary 0. Welch, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
   LEHAN, Judge.

Defendant contends that his enhanced sentence as an habitual offender following his conviction for grand theft was erroneous because the trial court made no finding that the enhanced sentence was necessary to protect the public as required by section 775.04(3), Florida Statutes (1983). We agree. See Walker v. State, 462 So.2d 452 (Fla.1985); Brown v. State, 457 So.2d 1079 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984).

We find no merit in defendant’s remaining contention. See Rasul v. State, 465 So.2d 535 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); McCuiston v. State, 462 So.2d 830 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).

Reversed and remanded for resentenc-ing.

GRIMES, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.