REGINALD L. SMITH, 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 conviction for sexual battery was affirmed, but his sentence was set aside and remanded for resentencing to allow the trial court to determine whether he qualified as a youthful offender under section 948.04, Florida Statutes, based on evidence of his prior record.
A defendant convicted of sexual battery at age seventeen is mandatorily entitled to youthful offender sentencing unless he had been previously found guilty of a felony or adjudicated guilty of an act constituting a capital, life, or first-degree felony.
[1] A defendant convicted of a felony at age seventeen is mandatorily entitled to youthful offender sentencing under section 948.04, Florida Statutes, unless previously found…
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 intelligenceAppellant was seventeen years old when he committed sexual battery under section 794.011(5), Florida Statutes. The record indicated he had a prior rec…
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 Prior Criminal Record cases and more on FLexlaw
ORFINGER, Judge.
Apj>ellant contends that he should have been sentenced as a youthful offender un der section 948.04, Florida Statutes (1979), following his conviction for sexual battery under section 794.011(5), Florida Statutes (1979). The record clearly shows that he was seventeen years old at the time of the offense, so under the statute in effect at that time, he was mandatorily entitled to be sentenced as a youthful offender, unless he had been previously found guilty of a felony or had been adjudicated guilty for an act which would be a capital, life or first degree felony if committed by an adult. Durden v. State, 407 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981).
Although the record indicates that appellant did have a prior record, there is nothing in the record before us to evidence the nature of his prior crimes or delinquent acts.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed, but the sentence is set aside and the case is remanded for resentencing. The State shall have the opportunity at the resentencing hearing to present evidence of appellant’s prior record so that the trial court may determine if appellant is mandatorily entitled to the benefits of the Youthful Offender Act. See Durden.
REMANDED for resentencing.
FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr. and SHARP, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Mantooth v. State, 407 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
- Durden v. State, 407 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)