ANTHONY JEROME COX, A/K/A ALBERT A. HIMMWAY, 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.
A defendant cannot simultaneously serve a prison term and be on probation; the prison term interrupts probation.
Defendant admitted violating probation conditions. The trial court revoked probation for grand theft and imposed a five-year prison sentence, to run c…
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 Probation cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHEB, Judge.
Defendant pled nolo contendere to charges of burglary of a dwelling and grand theft. The trial judge adjudicated him guilty and placed him on concurrent terms of fifteen-years probation for the burglary and five years probation for the grand theft. Subsequently, at a revocation hearing, the defendant admitted violating several conditions of probation. The trial judge decided not to revoke defendant’s fifteen-year probation for burglary; however, he revoked his five-year probation for grand theft. The court sentenced defendant to five years imprisonment for the latter offense to run concurrently with the remaining portion of the fifteen-year term of probation.
Defendant now contends the trial court erred by imposing concurrent terms of probation and imprisonment. We agree.
A defendant cannot serve a prison term and be on probation simultaneously. Brudie v. State, 467 So. 2d 1113 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). See also Boy v. State, 207 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967). Therefore, we construe the trial court’s sentencing order as interrupting defendant’s term of probation for the period of incarceration imposed on the theft charge. Thus, upon release from prison, defendant shall receive a credit for time actually served in prison against the then remaining portion of his fifteen-year term of probation.
Accordingly, we affirm defendant’s conviction and sentence for grand theft. We affirm defendant’s conviction for burglary and his term of probation as herein construed.
GRIMES, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jackson v. State, 615 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)…1st DCA 1987). The state, on the other hand, contends that the result of this oral pronouncement is that the appellant will serve the jail term of Count I, then the jail term of Count II, then the probationary period of Count I. Cf., Cox v. State, 468 So. 2d 437 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985) (under similar sentencing scheme jail time merely results in permissible interruption of probationary term); accord Delk v. State, 510 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). The written sentence is not helpful in clarifying the ambiguity…
-
Porter v. State, 585 So. 2d 399 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…consequent sentences, which are unchallenged here, effected the interruption of his sentence. Thus, we decline to extend the Lanier and Calhoun holdings to this case. Relying upon Delk v. State, 510 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) and Cox v. State, 468 So. 2d 437 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), appellant further argues that he is entitled to credit against his Gadsden County term of probation for the time served in prison on the Leon County sentences. He asserts that since the Leon County prison terms extended beyond th…
-
Delk v. State, 510 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)…orders to reflect that appellant’s terms of probation are interrupted for the periods of incarceration, and that he should receive credit for time served in prison against his then-remaining concurrent fifteen-year terms of probation. Cox v. State, 468 So. 2d 437 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Further, on remand the trial court is directed to specify a sum certain to be ordered as restitution. Finally, we hold that the imposition of community service upon appellant pursuant to section 27.3455 violates the ex post fact…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- ROY v. State, 207 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)
- Brudie v. State, 467 So. 2d 1113 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)