JAMES LEROY CROSBY, 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.
Crosby, classified as a youthful offender, appealed his revocation of probation and resulting eight-year sentences. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's jurisdiction to revoke probation but reversed and remanded because the sentences imposed exceeded the maximum allowed under the Florida Youthful Offender Act.
The trial court had jurisdiction to revoke probation and impose sanctions against a youthful offender for violating community control terms. However, the eight-year sentences violated the Youthful Offender Act because they exceeded the maximum four-year incarceration and two-year community control limitations prescribed by statute.
[1] A circuit court retains jurisdiction to impose sanctions for violations of community control after a youthful offender has been sentenced under the Florida Youthful Offen…
[2] Sentences imposed upon a youthful offender that exceed the maximum incarceration and community control periods allowed by the Florida Youthful Offender Act are erroneous.
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“After a youthful offender has been sentenced under the Youthful Offender Act, the circuit court has jurisdiction to impose sanctions against him for violating the terms of his community control program.”
Establishes that trial courts retain jurisdiction to enforce youthful offender sentences and revoke probation.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCrosby was adjudicated guilty of two burglary charges on October 1, 1980, and sentenced under the Youthful Offender Act to four years imprisonment fol…
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 Florida Youthful Offender Act cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHOONOVER, Judge.
Appellant, James Leroy Crosby, has appealed from the judgments and sentences entered against him in connection with two informations charging him with burglary of a dwelling in violation of section 810.-02(3), Florida Statutes (1979). We affirm in part and reverse in part.
On October 1,1980, appellant was adjudicated guilty of both charges, and pursuant to the Florida Youthful Offender Act, chapter 958 Florida Statutes (1979), concurrent sentences of four years imprisonment followed by two years probation in a community control program were imposed upon him. On March 26, 1984, appellant was found guilty of violating his probation. Appellant’s probation was revoked, and he was sentenced to serve concurrent sentences of eight years imprisonment on each of the original charges. Appellant then filed a timely notice of appeal.
We reject appellant’s contention that the trial court did not have jurisdiction to hear and determine this matter. After a youthful offender has been sentenced under the Youthful Offender Act, the circuit court has jurisdiction to impose sanctions against him for violating the terms of his community control program. Loveless v. Bryson, 460 So. 2d 942 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); accord Clem v. State, 462 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Bradley v. State, 462 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984).
We agree with appellant’s contention that the trial court erred in imposing two eight-year sentences for his violation of community control. Once a party is classified as a youthful offender, the trial court must sentence the party in accordance with the Youthful Offender Act. Waugh v. State, 406 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). Pursuant to the Act, a defendant can be sentenced to a maximum of four years of incarceration (with appropriate jail credit), and to a maximum of two years of community control. § 958.05(2), Fla.Stat. (1983); Ellis v. State, 436 So. 2d 342 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983), pet. for rev. den., 443 So. 2d 980 (Fla.1984). Since the sentences imposed upon the appellant exceed the maximum allowed by the Youthful Offender Act, the court erred in imposing them.
We, accordingly, affirm the judgments entered herein but remand to the trial court for resentencing pursuant to the Florida Youthful Offender Act. Waugh.
Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent herewith.
GRIMES, A.C.J., and SCHEB, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
State v. Arnette, 604 So. 2d 482 (Fla. 1992)…1986); Timothy Crosby v. State, 475 So. 2d 1034 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Lane v. State, 470 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Hart v. State, 463 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Clem v. State, 462 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); James Crosby (II) v. State, 462 So. 2d 607 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Ellis v. State, 436 So. 2d 342 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983), rev. denied, 443 So. 2d 980 (Fla.1984); Brandle v. State, 406 So. 2d 1221 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Greene v. State, 398 So. 2d 1011 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), appeal dis’m., 406 So. 2d 11…
-
Brown v. State, 492 So. 2d 822 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)…youthful offender, the defendant could receive any sentence the trial court could have originally imposed without regard to the youthful offender provisions. Crosby v. State, 487 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986) (Crosby II); see also, Crosby v. State, 462 So. 2d 607 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985) (Crosby I). Here, the record [*824] indicates that the court intended to resen-tence appellant under the Youthful Offender Act. As the six-year term of incarceration imposed upon the appellant exceeded the maximum four-year term a…
-
Lane v. State, 470 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)…(Fla.1985) and Bradley v. State, 462 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) authorize such a procedure and sanction for violators. See also Hart v. State, 463 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Moore v. State, 463 So. 2d 406 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Crosby v. State, 462 So. 2d 607 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Loveless v. Bryson, 460 So. 2d 942 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (on motion for rehearing); Clem v. State, 462 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (on motion for rehearing); Smith v. State, 455 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). The single case no…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Clem v. State, 462 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
- Loveless v. Bryson, 460 So. 2d 942 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- Ellis v. State, 436 So. 2d 342 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
- Bradley v. State, 462 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)
- Mason T. Pruner v. ST. Paul Guardian Ins. Co., 406 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)
- Thomas v. Waugh, 406 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)