JOHN ERROL FERGUSON, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that a criminal trial cannot be construed as a probation revocation hearing without stipulation or consent, but affirmed the revocation order while reversing the sentence for failure to credit time served.
John Errol Ferguson was convicted of resisting an officer and placed on probation. While on probation, he was convicted of first-degree murder. The tr…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Credit For Time Served cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
John Errol Ferguson appeals an order revoking his probation and sentencing him to a five year term of imprisonment.
Ferguson was convicted of resisting an officer with violence to his person and was sentenced to 18 months incarceration followed by’ two years probation. While on probation, Ferguson was charged with first degree murder, tried and convicted. At the conclusion of the murder trial, the court revoked his probation and sentenced him to five years on his initial conviction for resisting an officer. On appeal Ferguson contends the court erred in revoking his probation at the conclusion of the murder trial without holding a separate revocation hearing and/or notifying him that the murder trial would be utilized as a revocation hearing. We cannot agree.
In the absence of a stipulation or consent, the trial of a criminal case should not be construed as a probation revocation hearing, but can be treated as such upon stipulation or consent made before or after the trial. State v. Spratling, 336 So. 2d 361 (Fla.1976).
The record reflects that Ferguson’s counsel agreed with the trial judge that not only was Ferguson on probation at the time of the murder and understood the conditions of his probation, but also that there would be no need for a separate revocation hearing as the results of the probation violation would be determined by the outcome of the murder trial.
Ferguson next contends the trial court erred in imposing the five year sentence without crediting the defendant with the 18 months served on the original sentence.
We find this point well taken under the holding in State v. Holmes, 360 So. 2d 380 (Fla.1978). Accordingly, we reverse the sentence and remand the cause to the trial court with directions to impose a new sentence giving Ferguson credit for the time served on his original sentence.
In all other respects the revocation order appealed is affirmed.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Whitchard v. State, 459 So. 2d 439 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)…(Fla.1980). Appellant further contends that the sentencing court erred in failing to award credit for time served on the original sentence prior to commencement of the probation term. See State v. Jones, 327 So. 2d 18 (Fla.1976); Ferguson v. State, 372 So. 2d 209 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). ' This issue may not be raised for the first time on appeal, but instead should be presented to the trial court by a motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Spurlock v. State, 449 S…
-
Garvin v. State, 413 So. 2d 477 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)…ion of the order is affirmed. Watkins v. State, 368 So. 2d 363 (Fla.2d DCA 1979). However, we remand the cause to the trial court with directions to impose a sentence reflecting credit for the time served on the original sentence. Ferguson v. State, 372 So. 2d 209 (Fla.3d DCA 1979). Appellant need not be present for this purpose. SCHEB, C. J., and GRIMES and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.…
-
Robinson v. State, 474 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…n hearing but can be treated as such upon stipulation or consent made before or after the trial.” In the instant case, defense counsel refused to consent to the consolidation and, thus, the trial court’s actions were improper. Cf. Ferguson v. State, 372 So. 2d 209 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). Even if the cases had been properly consolidated, reversal would nonetheless be required in view of the fact that the basis for impeachment is no longer viable. We accordingly remand Case No. 83-2497 for a new trial. In view of…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Holmes, 360 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 1978)
- State v. Spratling, 336 So. 2d 361 (Fla. 1976)