LEONARD F. HICKS, APPELLANT,
v.
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 the trial court erred by failing to state the justification for retaining jurisdiction over the defendant at sentencing, as required by statute.
Appellant was convicted of aggravated battery and sexual battery. The trial court retained jurisdiction over the defendant for a portion of his senten…
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.
GRIMES, Judge.
A jury found appellant guilty of aggravated battery and sexual battery with force not likely to cause physical injury. He was convicted primarily upon the testimony of the victim. Nevertheless, the court did not err in declining to charge the jury to treat the uncorroborated testimony of the victim with caution. Pendleton v. State, 348 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977); Williamson v. State, 338 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); § 794.022(1), Fla.Stat. (1979).
The court sentenced appellant to concurrent fifteen and five year terms of imprisonment, and the sentencing order stated that the “court maintains jurisdiction over defendant.” Section 947.16(3), Florida Statutes (1979), provides that where a defendant is convicted of certain enumerated offenses a trial judge may retain jurisdiction over the defendant for the first one-third of his sentence. However, subsection (a) of that section requires that where a judge chooses to do so he must state on the record his justification with “individual particularity.” While sexual battery and ag gravated battery are both among the contemplated offenses, here the trial judge failed to note any justification for his retention of jurisdiction on the sentencing order. The transcript of the sentencing hearing is also silent in this regard.
Accordingly, we remand the case to the court with instructions either to relinquish jurisdiction over the appellant or to include in the record the justification for the retention of jurisdiction. Otherwise, we affirm the judgments and sentences.
SCHEB, C. J., and CAMPBELL, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Autley Mobley v. State, 409 So. 2d 1031 (Fla. 1982)…ny findings justifying his retention of jurisdiction. Therefore we vacate that portion of the judgment and sentence and remand these cases so that he may make such findings part of the record as required by section 947.-16(3)(a). See Hicks v. State, 388 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); Tompkins v. State, 386 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). Finally, we address the two points raised solely by appellant Styles. We have [*1039] reviewed the entire record and we find that there is independent proof of his involveme…
-
Watson v. State, 504 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…ion that, where there are no witnesses to alleged act, testimony of rape victim should be “rigidly scrutinized,” is plainly erroneous and not the law of this state). Accord, Pendleton v. State, 348 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977) and Hicks v. State, 388 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). The next issue concerns a separate order entered in this cause wherein the trial court found: Although this defendant meets the definition of a “habitual felony offender” this Court, in considering all the evidence adduced, is…
-
Marr v. State, 470 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)…opinion, in which ZEHMER, J., concurs and SMITH, J., concurs in part. . Notice of this determination was provided to the parties by order of the court dated March 25, 1985. . Pendelton v. State, 348 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977); Hicks v. State, 388 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); and Williamson v. State, 338 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). . Section 2.04, Florida Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases, 2d Ed. . Volume 11, Encyclopedia Britannica (1963), at 91: HALE, SIR MATTHEW (1609-1676), lord c…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Williamson v. State, 338 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)
- Pendleton v. State, 348 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)
- The Cleveland Tr. Co. v. Rickards Elec. Serv., Inc., 348 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)