MURDOCK MACK, 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 struck the concurrent three-year minimum mandatory terms imposed under the Youthful Offender Act, holding that a defendant sentenced on multiple counts in a single proceeding is not automatically ineligible for youthful offender treatment on subsequent counts merely because classified as such on the first count.
A defendant sentenced on multiple counts is not automatically ineligible for youthful offender classification on subsequent counts solely because previously classified as a youthful offender on an earlier count.
[1] A defendant sentenced on multiple counts in a single proceeding is not automatically ineligible for discretionary youthful offender classification on subsequent counts me…
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“the existence of two or more contemporaneous felony convictions does not preclude a defendant from being classified as a youthful offender, it merely excludes him from mandatory classification as such”
Court's reliance on State v. Goodson to reject the state's argument that multiple-count sentencing automatically disqualifies youthful offender treatment
Murdock Mack was sentenced under the Youthful Offender Act on a multiple-count information with concurrent three-year minimum mandatory terms 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 Minimum Mandatory Term cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Judge.
On the authority of Whitlock v. State, 404 So. 2d 795 (Fla.3d DCA 1981) and Trent v. State, 403 So. 2d 1131 (Fla.4th DCA 1981), that portion of the sentence entered below pursuant to the Youthful Offender Act, Secs. 958.04-.05 Fla.Stat. (1979) which imposes concurrent three-year minimum mandatory terms under Sec. 775.087(2), Fla. Stat. (1979) is stricken from the order under review, which is otherwise affirmed.1
Affirmed in part, reversed in part.
. We utterly reject the state’s imaginative contention that whenever, as here, a defendant is sentenced on a multiple-count information, he is ineligible as a matter of law for treatment as a youthful offender under Sec. 958.04(1) as to any succeeding counts since he has “previously been classified a youthful offender,” Sec. 958.-04(l)(c), under the first count. This argument, which would effectively deny youthful offender status in any multiple-count situation, is directly contrary to the statement in State v. Goodson, 403 So. 2d 1337, 1340 (Fla.1981) that “. .. the existence of two or more contemporaneous felony convictions does not preclude a defendant from being classified as a youthful offender, it merely excludes him from mandatory classification as such. See § 958.04(3), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1978).”
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Goodson, 403 So. 2d 1337 (Fla. 1981)
- Whitlock v. State, 404 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Trent v. State, 403 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)