Case Name: James Lee SYKES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1992-11-18
Citations: 608 So. 2d 933
Docket Number: No. 91-1718
Parties: James Lee SYKES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: GLICKSTEIN, C.J., and DOWNEY and DELL, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 608
Pages: 933–934

Head Matter:
James Lee SYKES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 91-1718.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Nov. 18, 1992.
Certification Denied Dec. 30, 1992.
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Allen J. DeWeese, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Melvina Racey Flaherty, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a judgment of guilty of burglary and felony petit theft. We affirm that judgment.
This is also an appeal from a judgment of guilty as an habitual offender and from the sentences. Appellant points out and the state concedes that the trial court failed to make the requisite statutory findings before sentencing appellant as an habitual offender. See § 775.084(l)(a), Fla.Stat. (1989). Subsection (3) of the above statute clearly spells out the requirements of the separate proceeding. Accordingly, we reverse and remand that judgment and sentence with direction to comply with the statute.
Appellant's argument that he must be given a non-habitual sentence upon remand is without merit. See Johnson v. State, 576 So.2d 916, 918 (Fla. 2d DCA1991); Rolle v. State, 586 So.2d 1293 (Fla. 4th DCA1991).
Appellant concedes that the written sentence does conform to the oral pronouncement of sentence. Accordingly, we affirm as to appellant's third point on appeal.
GLICKSTEIN, C.J., and DOWNEY and DELL, JJ., concur.