Case ID: so2d_649/html/0352-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Arthur DIAZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 93-2670.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Feb. 8, 1995.
    Diane V. Ward, Miami, for appellant.
    
      Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Joni Braunstein, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.
    Before HUBBART, BASKIN and LEVY, JJ-
   PER CURIAM.

Arthur Diaz appeals a judgment of convictions and sentence. Finding no merit in the points raised on appeal, we affirm the convictions. Defendant’s sentence, however, must be corrected. The trial court orally imposed a three-year minimum mandatory sentence, but failed to impose the minimum mandatory on a specific count. Thus, the written sentence representing a minimum mandatory sentence imposed on each count is incorrect. As the state properly concedes, the trial court must correct the sentence to reflect that the minimum mandatory sentence is imposed on count I only. § 775.087(2), Fla. Stat. (1989). Accordingly, we affirm the convictions, vacate the sentence, and remand with directions.