Case Name: Paul Michael DOMBROWSKI, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1997-06-11
Citations: 695 So. 2d 470
Docket Number: No. 96-1212
Parties: Paul Michael DOMBROWSKI, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: WARNER, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 695
Pages: 470–471

Head Matter:
Paul Michael DOMBROWSKI, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 96-1212.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
June 11, 1997.
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Susan D. Cline, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Aubin Wade Robinson, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We affirm appellant's conviction and sentence as an habitual felony offender. We reject his claim that the trial court's imposition of the maximum habitual offender term was the result of judicial vindictiveness for appellant's failure to accept a prior plea bargain. From our reading of the transcript, no plea bargain was in fact offered. However, even if it was, we find no judicial vindictiveness. Batista v. State, 685 So.2d 20 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); see also Frazier v. State, 467 So.2d 447, 450-51 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. dismissed, 475 So.2d 694 (Fla.1985).
With respect to appellant's contention that the trial court erred in sentencing appellant as an habitual offender on the evidence presented by the state, we agree with the state that the appellant did not properly preserve this issue by objecting to the introduction of this evidence on the grounds asserted on appeal.
AFFIRMED.
WARNER, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.