AUSTIN RAMIREZ, 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.
Appellant's sentence was reversed because the trial court imposed an improper general sentence covering both escape and resisting arrest convictions, and the probation term exceeded the statutory maximum for the misdemeanor offense.
General sentences covering multiple offenses are improper, and a sentence must be imposed separately for each crime with each sentence respecting the statutory maximum for that offense.
[1] A trial court may not impose a general sentence covering multiple offenses; instead, a separate sentence must be imposed for each offense, with each sentence respecting t…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“general sentences are no longer proper and may not be imposed by any trial court”
The court cited Dorfman v. State to establish that general sentences violate sentencing requirements.
Appellant was convicted of escape (a second degree felony) and resisting arrest without violence (a first degree misdemeanor). The trial judge imposed…
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 Misdemeanor Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
RYDER, Judge.
Appellant was tried and convicted of the separate offenses of escape and resisting arrest without violence. He contends his sentence was improper inasmuch as it was a general sentence covering both offenses and because it was in excess of the statutory maximum allowed for resisting arrest without violence. We agree.
Subsequent to being adjudicated guilty of escape and resisting arrest without violence, the trial judge pronounced a general sentence, without specificity, that the appellant would be placed on five years probation with the special condition that he reside in the county jail or stockade for a period of one year. The crime, escape, is classified as a second degree felony punishable by up to fifteen years imprisonment,1 while resisting arrest without violence is a first degree misdemeanor carrying a one-year maximum sentence.2 Clearly, placing appellant on probation for five years exceeds the statutory maximum in the misdemeanor conviction.
The Florida Supreme Court held in Dorfman v. State, 351 So. 2d 954 (Fla.1977), that general sentences are no longer proper and may not be imposed by any trial court. Dorfman controls here. The trial judge imposed a general sentence in violation thereof and therefore we reverse, set aside the sentence imposed and remand the matter to the trial court with instructions to resentence appellant, imposing a single sentence as to each crime. Appellant will be present at the time of sentencing. REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions.
SCHEB, C. J., and DANAHY, J., concur. . § 944.40, Fla.Stat. (1979).
. § 843.02, Fla.Stat. (1979).