NORMAN D. WOLFER, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF DUANE D. WOLFER, DECEASED, ON BEHALF OF THE DECEDENT'S SURVIVORS, NORMAN D. WOLFER AND SEAN A. WOLFER, AND THE ESTATE OF DUANE D. WOLFER, DECEASED, APPELLANTS,

v.

GEORGE HYMAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Scott v. State, 423 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
  …was enhanced pursuant to Section 775.084(4), Florida Statutes (1979) and is supported only by the oral finding that “this is necessary for the protection of society”, which finding is woefully short of what is required by the statute. Ruiz v. State, 407 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). We reverse the enhanced portion of the sentence and remand for further findings and resentencing in accordance with this opinion. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.…
• Brown v. State, 435 So. 2d 940 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
  …the cause is remanded to the trial court to make the requisite specific finding that such a sentence is necessary for the protection of the public from further criminal activity by the defendant, see § 775.084(4)(a), Fla.Stat. (1981); Ruiz v. State, 407 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), or if such a finding is not supported by the record, to vacate the habitual offender sentence. We recognize this sentencing error despite the defendant’s failure to preserve the issue below. See Gonzalez v. State, 392 So. 2d 334…
• Johnson v. State, 472 So. 2d 553 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
  …fender statute was necessary for the protection of the public. Thus, this case must be remanded to the lower court for such a finding. See Walker v. State, 462 So. 2d 452 (Fla.1985); Little v. State, 440 So. 2d 603 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Ruiz v. State, 407 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Eichhorn v. State, 386 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Adams v. State, 376 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). The second contention raised by the appellant is that the trial court did not have sufficient evidence on which to base a…

Authorities Cited

• Motchkavitz v. L. C. Boggs Indus., Inc., 407 So. 2d 910 (Fla. 1981)