EARL SANDERS, 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.
Earl Sanders appealed his sentences imposed after a probation revocation hearing. The Florida appellate court found that Sanders's 99-year sentence for robbery with a weapon exceeded the 30-year statutory maximum for that crime and remanded for resentencing, while also requiring the trial court to provide adequate justification for retaining jurisdiction over one-third of the sentences as required by statute.
The court held that Sanders's ninety-nine-year sentence for robbery with a weapon must be reduced to thirty years, the statutory maximum for that crime. The court also held that the trial court must either relinquish retention of jurisdiction over one-third of the sentences or provide written findings of fact and individual justification on the record as required by section 947.16(3)(a).
[1] A sentence for robbery with a weapon cannot exceed thirty years unless the information alleges the use of a firearm or deadly weapon.
[2] A trial judge must state with individual particularity the justification for retaining jurisdiction over a portion of a sentence on the record.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Robbery with a weapon is a first degree felony, § 812.13(2Xb), Fla.Stat. (1979), punishable by a maximum sentence of thirty years.”
Establishes the statutory maximum sentence for the robbery with a weapon conviction, making the 99-year sentence illegal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSanders pled guilty to robbery with a weapon and robbery with a firearm, initially receiving withheld adjudication and fifteen years probation on each…
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 Felony Classification cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant pled guilty to robbery with a weapon and robbery with a firearm. Adjudication of guilt on both charges was withheld, and appellant was placed on fifteen years probation on each charge, to run concurrently.
Subsequently, appellant admitted violating the terms and conditions of his probation at a revocation of probation hearing. The trial judge adjudicated appellant guilty on both charges and sentenced him to serve ninety-nine years in prison on each, to run concurrently. The court retained jurisdiction over one third of appellant’s sentences.
Robbery with a weapon is a first degree felony, § 812.13(2Xb), Fla.Stat. (1979), punishable by a maximum sentence of thirty years. § 775.082(3)(b), Fla.Stat. (1979). The information for this robbery did not allege the use of a firearm or deadly weapon, which would have made a life sentence permissible under section 812.13(2Xa), Florida Statutes (1979). Miller v. State, 370 So. 2d 73 (Fla.2d DCA 1979). Also the sentencing order stated that “Judge Coe retains jurisdiction for one third of sentence” pursuant to section 947.-16(3), Florida Statutes (1979). However, this statute requires the trial judge to state with individual particularity justification for such retention on the record before such a retention can be made. See LaChance v. State, 396 So. 2d 1234 (Fla.2d DCA 1981); Hicks v. State, 388 So. 2d 357 (Fla.2d DCA 1980). Here the trial judge failed to note any justification for his retention of jurisdiction on the sentencing order. The transcript of the sentencing hearing also provides us with no help.
Accordingly, we remand the case with instructions to reduce appellant’s sentence to thirty years for his conviction of robbery with a weapon. The sentence of ninety-nine years on the charge of robbery with a firearm is affirmed; however, it is remanded to the lower court with instructions to either relinquish the retention of jurisdiction over the one third of appellant’s sentence or to make findings of fact and justification, with individual particularity, as is required by section 947.16(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1979), to justify the retention of jurisdiction.
SCHEB, C. J., and GRIMES and CAMPBELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hampton v. State, 764 So. 2d 829 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…2d 316, 317 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). To satisfy the requirements of statutory subsection' (3)(a), a trial court must state with individual particularity the justification for retaining jurisdiction over a portion of the sentence. See Sanders v. State, 400 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). This “specificity and particularity” requirement is not satisfied where a trial court merely refers generally to the “circumstances surrounding the particular incidents,” “the nature of both offenses,” “the seriousness of the off…
-
Oliver v. State, 414 So. 2d 1087 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)…f the sentence. Accordingly, we REMAND to the court with instructions to either relinquish jurisdiction over the first third of the sentence or state with individual particularity the justification for retaining jurisdiction. See Sanders v. State, 400 So. 2d 1015, 1016 (Fla.2d DCA 1981); § 947.16(3), Fla.Stat. (1981). SCHEB, C. J., and OTT and SCHOON-OVER, JJ., concur.…
-
Rolland A. Schultz v. State, 411 So. 2d 892 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)…linquish the retention of jurisdiction over the one-third of appellant’s sentence or to make findings of fact and justification as required by section 947.16(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1979), to justify the retention of jurisdiction. Sanders v. State, 400 So. 2d 1015 (Fla.2d DCA 1981). RYDER, A. C. J., and CAMPBELL and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.…
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
- Hicks v. State, 388 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)
- LaCHANCE v. State, 396 So. 2d 1234 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)
- Miller v. State, 370 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)