Court Opinion

ID: 4247735
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2018-02-23 15:09:37.68297+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:24:06.418836
License: Public Domain

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
                STATE OF FLORIDA
                 _____________________________

                         No. 1D17-3298
                 _____________________________

BRYAN FLOWERS,

    Appellant,

    v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

    Appellee.
                 _____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.
Linda F. McCallum, Judge.

                        February 23, 2018

PER CURIAM.

     AFFIRMED. See Hamilton v. State, 996 So. 2d 964, 966 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2008) (rejecting defendant’s claim that his sentence violates
Hale v. State, 630 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 1993), where, as here, the
sentence “do[es] not, in the aggregate, exceed the maximum he
could have received if all sentences subject to enhancement under
the habitual felony offender statute had been enhanced (but run
concurrently), and because his sentence[] also do[es] not, in the
aggregate, exceed the maximum he could have received if none of
his sentences had been enhanced but all had been ordered to run
consecutively”).

WETHERELL, ROWE, and JAY, JJ., concur.
                _____________________________

    Not final until disposition of any timely and
    authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
    9.331.
               _____________________________

Bryan Flowers, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

                               2