Cases from cite.case.law:

L. JENKINS, v. STATE, 269 So. 3d 584 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . See § 921.16, Fla. Stat. (2005) ; State v. Cantrell , 417 So.2d 260, 260 (Fla. 1982). AFFIRMED . . . .

L. COLSTON, v. STATE, 253 So. 3d 1152 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . See § 921.16(1), Fla. . . .

BILLUPS, v. STATE, 250 So. 3d 706 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . susceptible of differing constructions shall be construed most favorably to the accused.... [ Section 921.16 . . . Stat., and stretching those words to now authorize something that neither section 775.087 nor section 921.16 . . .

LARSON, v. STATE, 247 So. 3d 26 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . 2012 sentences would be served consecutively to the 2001 and 2003 sentences as required by section 921.16 . . . Larson argues, in part, that the application of the mandatory language of section 921.16(1), in the absence . . . (citing § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat. (1993) ) ). . . . Here, the failure of both the trial court and counsel to recognize the ramifications of section 921.16 . . . The Crump decision does not address pending conditional-release violations, Scantling, or section 921.16 . . .

LEE, v. STATE, 223 So. 3d 342 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . . §§ 921.00265(1), 921.16(1), Fla. Stat. (2013). . . .

T. PATTERSON, v. STATE, 206 So.3d 64 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . The State cites section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes (2016) to support its position that the sentences . . . But, it was not required to do so under § 921.16. . . .

CHARLES, v. STATE, 204 So.3d 63 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . See § 921.16(1), Fla. . . .

WOLCOFF, v. STATE, 197 So. 3d 111 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . crimes “charged in separate informations,” the presumption is that the sentences are consecutive, See § 921.16 . . . imposed for offenses not charged in the same information or indictment be served concurrently, section 921.16 . . .

BURNS, v. STATE, 190 So. 3d 257 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . As a result, pursuant to section 921.16, Florida.Statutes (2012), the sentence is to be served consecutively . . .

HUGHES, v. STATE, 189 So. 3d 848 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Finally, while section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes (2013), requires that Hughes’ sentences for counts . . . concurrently unless the court directs that two or more of the sentences be served consecutively." § 921.16 . . .

DENNARD, v. STATE, 157 So. 3d 1055 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . providing "the sentencing judge may order the sentences to be served concurrently or consecutively”); § 921.16 . . .

SCOTT, Jr. v. STATE, 161 So. 3d 437 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . See § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat. (1995); Benyard v. Wainwright, 322 So.2d 473 (Fla.1975); Hughes v. . . .

MOUNT, v. STATE, 97 So. 3d 951 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . Section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes (2011), explains when sentences are to run concurrently: A defendant . . . The court in Ransone further explained, “Pursuant to section 921.16(1), unless the trial court directs . . . cases, by operation of statute, the Broward sentence was consecutive to the Miami-Dade sentences. § 921.16 . . . Matthews, 891 So.2d 479, 481 (Fla.2004) (explaining that, pursuant to section 921.16(1), because the . . . Fourth District properly applied our precedent in Daniels and the statutory requirements of section 921.16 . . .

SHIVERS, v. STATE, 96 So. 3d 1039 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . See § 921.16, Fla. . . .

W. LINK, v. S. TUCKER,, 870 F. Supp. 2d 1309 (N.D. Fla. 2012)

. . . points on the score-sheet; and consecutive sentences are expressly authorized by §§ 921.0024(2) and 921.16 . . . Stat. § 921.16(1); see also Fla. . . .

G. BUSS, v. REICHMAN, a k a a k a a k a, 53 So. 3d 339 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . . § 3584(a); § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat. (1989). . . .

CARTER, v. STATE, 67 So. 3d 242 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . . § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat. (2005). In the sole ground in his motion, Mr. . . .

E. RANSONE, v. STATE, 48 So. 3d 692 (Fla. 2010)

. . . (citing § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat. (2004)). . . . Section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes (2004), sets forth when sentences are to run concurrently: A defendant . . . Pursuant to section 921.16(1), unless the trial court directs that sentences for separately charged offenses . . . Fourth District properly applied our precedent in Daniels and the statutory requirements of section 921.16 . . . Therefore, under section 921.16(1), Ran-sone’s Broward sentence was consecutive to his previous Miami-Dade . . .

O. COTTENGIM, v. STATE, 44 So. 3d 209 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . The operative statute is section 921.16(3), Florida Statutes (2005). . . .

CALDWELL, v. STATE, 41 So. 3d 1094 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . On appeal, Caldwell argues that section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes (2007), requires sentences to be . . .

RANSONE, v. STATE, 20 So. 3d 445 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . . § 921.16(1), Fla. . . . Matthews, 891 So.2d 479, 481 (Fla.2004) (explaining that, pursuant to section 921.16(1), because the . . . This conclusion conflicts with section 921.16(1) which provides that, unless a trial court specifies . . . Nevertheless, pursuant to section 921.16(1), the sentence on the unrelated case is consecutive not concurrent . . . imposed, and certify conflict with Tharpe which we believe conflicts with the requirements of section 921.16 . . .

SMALLS, v. STATE, 126 So. 3d 257 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . . § 921.16, Fla. Stat. (2001); Bilyou v. State, 404 So.2d 744 (Fla.1981); State v. . . .

PERRY, v. STATE, 13 So. 3d 1112 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . State, 650 So.2d 1093 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat. (2005). . . .

OREGON v. ICE, 555 U.S. 160 (U.S. 2009)

. . . . §921.16 (2007)); Kansas (Kan. Stat. Ann. §21-4608 (2007)); Mississippi (Miss. . . .

C. BURNS a k a v. STATE, 995 So. 2d 1115 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . See § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat. (2000). . . .

A. MIMS, v. STATE, 994 So. 2d 1233 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . To the contrary, section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes (2000), made it clear that the two sentences would . . .

COBB, v. STATE, 990 So. 2d 609 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . sentence a criminal defendant to concurrent or consecutive sentences,” citing sections 775.021(4)(a), 921.16 . . .

DRAKES, v. STATE, 990 So. 2d 592 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . See § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat.; Harris v. . . .

W. NIELSON, v. STATE, 984 So. 2d 587 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . Nielson’s sentences consecutively pursuant to section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes (1983), which provides . . . served concurrently with the other sentences, the Department of Corrections has properly obeyed section 921.16 . . . the sentence is concurrent or consecutive to any active sentence being served is not marked, section 921.16 . . .

MYERS a k a v. STATE, 980 So. 2d 1204 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . See § 921.16, Fla. Stat. (1993). . . .

FORD, v. STATE, 975 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . See § 921.16(1), Fla. . . . imposed for offenses not charged in the same information or indictment be served concurrently, section 921.16 . . .

JOHNSON, a k a II, v. STATE, 973 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . argued that his consecutive sentences did not comply with the oral pronouncement and that under section 921.16 . . . Discussion Section 921.16(1) provides, in pertinent part: A defendant convicted of two or more offenses . . . Section 921.16 places the burden on the trial court “to sentence with certainty” in the oral pronouncement . . . Because the trial court did not direct otherwise, section 921.16(1) requires that Mr. . . .

SMITH, v. STATE, 968 So. 2d 675 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . See § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat. . . .

H. WITCHEL, v. STATE, 969 So. 2d 1143 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . See § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat. (2000); § 921.0024(2), Fla. Stat. (2000); § 775.021(4), Fla. . . .

HARDENBROOK, v. STATE, 953 So. 2d 717 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . See § 921.16(1), Fla. . . .

SANDERS, v. STATE, 955 So. 2d 35 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . See § 921.16, Fla. . . .

E. RICHARDSON, v. STATE, 947 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . . § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat. (2004); Byrd, v. State, 853 So.2d 1103 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); McCarthur v. . . .

ALMENDARES, v. STATE, 916 So. 2d 29 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . (“and the sentencing judge may order the sentences to be served concurrently or consecutively”); § 921.16 . . .

A. COLON, v. STATE, 905 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . Section 921.16(1) provides that concurrent sentences must be imposed unless the trial court specifically . . . However, section 921.16 provides the opposite. . . . Section 921.16 is inclusive, and it places the burden on the trial judge to sentence with certainty. . . . state filed that it intended to seek enhanced punishment as a prison releasee reof-fender. .Section 921.16 . . .

WHIPPLE, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, STATE, 892 So. 2d 554 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . Johns sentence pursuant to section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes (1995). . . . Johns sentence pursuant to the legislative mandates of section 921.16(1). See, e.g., Fox v. . . . See § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat. (1995). The rule of lenity, therefore, has no applicability herein. . . . consecutively unless the court directs that two or more of the sentences be served concurrently. § 921.16 . . .

STATE v. MATTHEWS,, 891 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 2004)

. . . However, pursuant to section 921.16(1) of the Florida Statutes (1995), because the trial court did not . . . sentence in case number 90-5611, the sentence was structured to run consecutively pursuant to section 921.16 . . . sentence in case number 90-5611, the sentence was structured to run consecutively pursuant to section 921.16 . . . Section 921.16(1) of the Florida Statutes (1995) provides: A defendant convicted of two or more offenses . . .

POWELL, Jr. v. STATE, 881 So. 2d 1180 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . no PRR sentence involved, the 2 sentences could have been imposed consecutively, pursuant to section 921.16 . . .

L. CAMPBELL, v. STATE, 884 So. 2d 190 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . See § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat. (1993). . . . See § 921.16(1); Ashley v. State, 850 So.2d 1265 (Fla.2003); Hunter v. . . .

WILSON a k a v. STATE, 873 So. 2d 419 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . See § 921.16, Fla. . . .

R. GANDY, a k a v. STATE, 857 So. 2d 289 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . See § 921.16, Fla. . . .

BYRD, v. STATE, 853 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . Section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes, provides that “[a] defendant convicted of two or more offenses charged . . .

DAVIS, v. STATE, 852 So. 2d 355 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . . § 921.16(2), Fla. Stat. (2002). . . .

J. GILBERT, v. STATE, 838 So. 2d 623 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . Since the trial court is allowed to impose consecutive sentences, see § 921.16, Fla. . . .

A. STROMAN, v. STATE, 837 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . In Rozmestor, the Fifth District held that section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes (1979), permitted a court . . . Similarly, section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes (Supp.1988), authorized Stroman’s sentencing court only . . . There were no changes in the wording of section 921.16(1) between the 1979 and 1988 versions. . . .

STATE v. ROMPRE,, 837 So. 2d 453 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . had given credit for in Citrus County [which counsel said the court had the discretion to do under 921.16 . . .

ROBINSON, v. STATE, 829 So. 2d 984 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . does not determine whether sentences under it are to be concurrent or consecutive, and because section 921.16 . . .

FOX, v. STATE, 827 So. 2d 377 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . .” § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat. (1991). . . .

SMITH, v. STATE, 807 So. 2d 733 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . release, the Department of Corrections deemed the sentences to run consecutive pursuant to section 921.16 . . .

DIAZ, v. STATE, 804 So. 2d 620 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . Consequently under section 921.16(1) Florida Statutes (2001), and Bruce v. . . .

SHARIFE, v. W. MOORE,, 795 So. 2d 105 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . See also § 921.16(2), Fla. Stat. (1991). . . .

R. GLENN, v. STATE, 776 So. 2d 330 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . below, the state responded to Glenn’s motion contending the Department of Corrections, under section 921.16 . . .

DURR, v. STATE, 773 So. 2d 644 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . 289731 (Fla. 1st DCA Mar. 21, 2000) which held that trial courts have discretion pursuant to section 921.16 . . . Section 921.16(1) is an integral part of the Criminal Punishment Code and applies to guidelines sentences . . . consecutive sentences under the Act if the crimes do not arise out of the same criminal episode, section 921.16 . . .

M. HOFFMAN, v. STATE, 776 So. 2d 286 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . Consecutive sentences on the two counts are permissible, § 921.16, Fla. . . .

HARRIS, v. STATE, 771 So. 2d 565 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . erred in imposing consecutive, as opposed to concurrent, sentences is without merit in light of section 921.16 . . .

T. BAKER, v. STATE, 760 So. 2d 1085 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . In addition, section 921.16 provides that sentences run concurrently if not otherwise specified. . . . Const. . 921.16. . . .

EMMETT, v. STATE, 764 So. 2d 675 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . each of which constitutes a separate violation of law, is subject to multiple sentencing); see also § 921.16 . . .

A. BRANCH, v. STATE, 790 So. 2d 437 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . Section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes (1997), states in pertinent part: A defendant convicted of two or . . . As the trial court was vested with the discretion pursuant to section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes (1997 . . .

McCARTHUR, v. STATE, 766 So. 2d 292 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . The trial court expressly declined to exercise its discretion under section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes . . . See § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat.; Bruce v. State, 679 So.2d 45 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). . . .

In A. McCULLEN, L. v. A., 244 B.R. 73 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 1999)

. . . Debtor’s husband lent the Debtor money out of his half of the proceeds so that the Debtor could pay a $921.16 . . .

COLON- MORALES, v. STATE, 743 So. 2d 101 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Section 921.16(2), Florida Statutes, has been construed as investing the Department of Corrections with . . .

KERKLIN, v. GODWIN,, 747 So. 2d 956 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . See § 921.16, Fla. . . .

DILLARD, v. STATE, 728 So. 2d 725 (Fla. 1999)

. . . See § 921.16, Fla. . . .

PORTER, v. STATE, 723 So. 2d 191 (Fla. 1998)

. . . See § 921.16, Fla. Stat. (1977). . . .

GULLEY, v. STATE, 706 So. 2d 110 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . See § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat. (1995). . . .

SHORT, v. STATE, 685 So. 2d 80 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . We note that, pursuant to section 921.16(1), Fla. . . .

BRUCE, v. STATE, 679 So. 2d 45 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . . § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat. (1993); see also Benyard v. . . . Section 921.16(1) states as follows: (1) A defendant convicted of two or more offenses charged in the . . . imposed for offenses not charged in the same information or indictment be served concurrently, section 921.16 . . .

PLATT, v. STATE, 664 So. 2d 307 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . DOC, on the other hand, relied on section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes (1993), and Kirkland v. . . .

STEVENSON, v. STATE, 659 So. 2d 432 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . Section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes (1993), provides in pertinent part: A defendant convicted of two . . .

B. JOHNSON, v. K. SINGLETARY,, 883 F. Supp. 1535 (M.D. Fla. 1995)

. . . . § 921.16(1) (emphasis added). . . .

ASHFORD, v. STATE, 652 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . . § 921.16(1), Fla.Stat. (1993). . . .

BUCHANAN, v. STATE, 644 So. 2d 583 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . He maintains that the trial court exceeded the discretion allowed it under section 921.16, Florida Statutes . . .

J. LEONE, v. STATE, 643 So. 2d 1198 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . Additionally, under section 921.16(2), Florida Statutes (1987), a court may, but is not required to, . . .

ANDERSON, v. STATE, 637 So. 2d 971 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . trial court’s consecutive sentencing, although seemingly consistent with section 775.021(4)(a) and 921.16 . . .

PAXSON, v. STATE, 637 So. 2d 341 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . his attorney was ineffective because she did not inform the court that it had the power under section 921.16 . . .

MILTON, v. STATE, 637 So. 2d 77 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . . § 921.16, Fla.Stat. (1993); Johnson v. State, 538 So.2d 553 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). . . .

KIRKLAND, v. STATE, 633 So. 2d 1138 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . See § 921.16(1), Fla.Stat. (1993). . . .

BOOMER, Jr. v. STATE, 616 So. 2d 991 (Fla. 1993)

. . . . § 921.16(1), Fla.Stat. (1985). See also § 775.021(4), Fla.Stat. (1985). . . .

MAULDEN, v. STATE, 617 So. 2d 298 (Fla. 1993)

. . . See § 921.16(1), Fla.Stat. (1987). . . .

DOYLE, v. STATE, 615 So. 2d 278 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . sentence concurrently with a federal sentence is by transfer to federal prison pursuant to section 921.16 . . .

L. KNIGHT, v. STATE, 611 So. 2d 602 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . See § 921.16(1), Fla.Stat. (1991). The trial court’s order fails to refute Knight’s claim. . . .

DAVIS, v. STATE, 606 So. 2d 470 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . trial court’s decision whether to make the sentence consecutive or concurrent is governed by section 921.16 . . .

JANNEY, v. STATE, 599 So. 2d 731 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . In Richardson, the court stated: Under section 921.16(2), Florida Statutes (1981), a Florida court may . . .

L. MACON, v. STATE, 596 So. 2d 769 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . However, since the judge did not order the sentences to run consecutive, section 921.16(1), Fla.Stat. . . .

TITO, v. STATE, 593 So. 2d 284 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . Section 921.16, Florida Statutes (1989), provides that sentences of imprisonment for offenses not charged . . .

STATE v. TRIPP,, 591 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . State, 554 So.2d 512 (Fla.1990), approving, 540 So.2d 158 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); § 921.16, Fla.Stat. (1987 . . .

SCHLOSSER, v. K. SINGLETARY, Jr., 597 So. 2d 304 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . Section 921.16(2), Florida Statutes (1989), provides that a Florida court “may direct that a sentence . . .

IBARRO, v. STATE, 588 So. 2d 334 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . See Sections 893.135, 921.16(1), Florida Statutes, and Berrio at 980. AFFIRMED. . . .

REYNOLDS, v. STATE, 580 So. 2d 254 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . While the state concedes that such credit appears to be statutorily mandated by section 921.16(1), it . . .

McWHITE, v. STATE, 578 So. 2d 46 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . Pursuant to section 921.16(1), Florida Statutes (1989), a defendant convicted of two or more crimes charged . . .

KILLINGS, v. STATE, 567 So. 2d 60 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . See § 921.16, Fla.Stat. (1987). . . .

BRANAM, v. STATE, 554 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 1990)

. . . to impose consecutive sentences, the court perceived a conflict between the guidelines and section 921.16 . . .

ASH, v. STATE, 554 So. 2d 553 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . . § 921.16, Fla.Stat.1987. . . . .

TURNER, v. STATE, 551 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . sentenced to 364 days in jail, to-be served consecutive to the first sentence by virtue of section 921.16 . . .

In A. N. J. a v. STATE, 554 So. 2d 531 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . See § 921.16(1) Fla.Stat. (1987). . . .

BRANAM, v. STATE, 540 So. 2d 158 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . whether the guidelines range takes precedence over the discretion given to a trial judge by section 921.16 . . . First, the guidelines law was enacted subsequent to section 921.16, Florida Statutes (1987) and thus . . . consecutive sentences would exceed the guidelines, we have no doubt that the judge’s discretion under section 921.16 . . .