RICARDO SAMITIER, A/K/A RICARDO SARRIA, A/K/A RICARDO SARNIA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1987-09-22
No. 86-2287
Per Curiam
513 So. 2d 1309 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1987)

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.

Synopsis

Defendant's convictions for grand theft second degree, dealing in stolen property, and RICO violations were affirmed, but sentences for grand theft convictions were reversed and remanded because they exceeded the statutory maximum of five years.


Holding

Sentences exceeding five years for grand theft second degree convictions must be reduced to comply with the statutory maximum under Florida law.


Headnotes

[1] Grand theft second degree under Florida law is a third degree felony punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of five years, and sentences exceeding this statutory ma…

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

Facts & Procedural History

Defendant was convicted of three counts of grand theft second degree, two counts of dealing in stolen property, and one count of violating Florida's R…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant was convicted of three counts of grand theft second degree, two counts of dealing in stolen property and one count of violating the State Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act, following a jury verdict finding him guilty. By this appeal, the defendant seeks reversal of his convictions and sentences.

All points raised in support of the defendant’s argument for reversal have been carefully considered in the light of the record on appeal, briefs and arguments of counsel.

We find merit in only one point: the defendant’s contention that the three concurrent five and one-half year sentences imposed for the three grand theft convictions exceed the maximum legal sentences for such offenses. Grand theft second degree, § 812.014(2)(b), Fla.Stat. (1985), is a third degree felony, punishable by a term of imprisonment not exceeding five years for each such conviction, § 775.082(3)(d), Fla.Stat. (1985).

Accordingly, we reverse the sentences imposed for the grand theft convictions and remand the cause to the trial court with directions to modify these sentences to conform with the statutory legal maximum penalty of five years. In all other respects, the convictions and sentences appealed from are affirmed. Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw