Case Name: Luis GONZALEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1995-03-22
Citations: 652 So. 2d 900
Docket Number: No. 94-1033
Parties: Luis GONZALEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BARKDULL and BASKIN, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 652
Pages: 900–900

Head Matter:
Luis GONZALEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 94-1033.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
March 22, 1995.
Rehearing Denied April 26, 1995.
Clayton R. Kaeiser, Miami, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Douglas J. Glaid, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BARKDULL and BASKIN, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We find no error in the evidentiary ruling complained of, the upward sentencing departure, Brown v. State, 611 So.2d 540 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992), review denied, 621 So.2d 1065 (Fla.1993); Barnes v. State, 597 So.2d 931 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992), review denied, 605 So.2d 1262 (Fla.1992); Hams v. State, 531 So.2d 1349 (Fla.1988); Moreira v. State, 500 So.2d 343 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); § 921.001(7), Fla. Stat. (1993), or the imposition of consecutive minimum mandatory terms. State v. Thomas, 487 So .2d 1043 (Fla.1986).
Affirmed.