PER CURIAM.
Appellant contends that the sentences in Circuit Court Case No. 87-485 and Circuit Court Case No. 87-1545 were erroneously not designated as concurrent to one another in accordance with his plea bargain and with the court's oral pronouncement at sentencing. Since the sentence for 87-1545 specifically orders that it shall run concurrent with the sentence in 87-485, we affirm.
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.