Case Name: Francisco DIAZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2002-01-23
Citations: 804 So. 2d 620
Docket Number: No. 3D01-2183
Parties: Francisco DIAZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before GERSTEN and FLETCHER, JJ., and NESBITT, Senior Judge.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 804
Pages: 620–620

Head Matter:
Francisco DIAZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 3D01-2183.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Jan. 23, 2002.
Francisco Diaz, in proper person.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and John D. Barker, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before GERSTEN and FLETCHER, JJ., and NESBITT, Senior Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
In considering a prior claim by this defendant, we determined that the trial court had correctly concluded that defendant's sentence should run consecutive to his original prior conviction. See Diaz v. State 715 So.2d 1128 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998) (ordering defendant's sentences on case numbers 93-30316, 93-33038, and 93-33837 were to run consecutive to sentences currently being served). Following remand, the defendant was charged with eight new separate felonies. In each case, defendant entered a plea of guilty. At each sentencing, the trial judge ordered that the sentence being imposed run concurrent to those sentences in the new group of eight for which sentencing had already been imposed. The trial judge did not, however, provide that any of these eight sentences be concurrent to any other prior sentences. Consequently under section 921.16(1) Florida Statutes (2001), and Bruce v. State, 679 So.2d 45, 46-47 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996), the trial court, here, considering defendant's motion for post conviction relief, correctly determined that the sentences at issue should run consecutive to defendant's prior sentences.
Accordingly, the order under review is affirmed.