JOHN CHARLES BOWEN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Youthful Offender Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., Judge.
Appellant appeals from an order denying his motion for post conviction relief. Appellant was convicted and sentenced on two counts of battery on a law enforcement officer. On count one, appellant was committed to the Department of Corrections as a youthful offender1 for four years, two years imprisonment followed by two years in a community control program. On count two appellant was placed on probation for five years, to run consecutively with the sentence under count one.
Appellant contends that under Villery v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 396 So. 2d 1107 (Fla.1981), his sentence on count one was an illegal split sentence. We disagree and AFFIRM the order based on the reasoning of Riley v. State, 407 So. 2d 967 (Fla.2d DCA 1981).
AFFIRMED.
DAUKSCH, C. J., and COBB, J., concur. . Chapter 958, Fla.Stat. (1979).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Spurlock v. State, 449 So. 2d 973 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)…obation is on parole following his release from incarceration, therefore not subject to the trial court’s jurisdiction at that point. We reject Clem v. State, find the trial court had jurisdiction and affirm the revocation order. See Bowen v. State, 415 So. 2d 142 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982) and Riley v. State, 407 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). The defendant also asserts the trial court failed to give credit for time served. Because he did not raise this matter below, we reject his assertion, without prejudice to…
-
Cmty. Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n of the Palm Beaches v. Orman, 446 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)…re, thereby giving rise to waiver or estoppel. See Campbell v. Werner, 232 So. 2d 252 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970) (note the dicta about the effect of a frustrated intent to pay, at 256); Schectman v. Grobbel, 226 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969); Bowen v. State, 415 So. 2d 142 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); and Clark v. Lachenmeier, 237 So. 2d 583 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970). In the case before us now, the trial court announced it was not suggesting that the lender “did anything but what it should have done.” Yet, it is alleged in the comp…
Authorities Cited
- Villery v. The Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 396 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. 1980)
- Riley v. State, 407 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)