DETROY LITTLES, 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.
Detroy Littles appealed his split sentences for five drug-related felonies. The court vacated sentences on four counts because the combined periods of imprisonment and probation exceeded the statutory maximum penalty for third-degree felonies, violating Florida sentencing law.
Split sentences on counts two through five are invalid because the combined periods of incarceration and probation exceed the five-year statutory maximum for third-degree felonies. Each sentence for a separate offense must individually fall within the statutory maximum period of incarceration for that offense.
[1] A sentence for a felony offense must individually fall within the statutory maximum penalty for that offense to be valid.
[2] The combined periods of incarceration and probation for a single offense cannot exceed the maximum period of incarceration provided by statute for that offense.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“the "combined periods [of incarceration and probation] at the time of the original sentence cannot exceed the maximum period of incarceration provided for the offense charged."”
The controlling legal standard from Holmes establishing that combined sentence periods must not exceed statutory maximums for the offense.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLittles was convicted of five felony counts: one count of second-degree felony cocaine sale and four counts of third-degree felonies (cocaine possessi…
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 Guideline Range cases and more on FLexlaw
ZEHMER, Judge.
Appellant received split sentences of 30 months imprisonment followed by five years probation to be served concurrently on each of five felony counts. The sentence on count one for the second degree felony of selling cocaine is within the 15 year maximum penalty for that offense, so its validity is not challenged by appellant. The sentences on counts two through five for possession of cocaine and sale of a substance in lieu of cocaine, all being third degree felonies, exceed the statutory maximum of five years imprisonment and are, therefore, invalid.1 State v. Holmes, 360 So. 2d 380 (Fla.1978); Lanier v. State, 504 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Howland v. State, 420 So. 2d 918 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Coleman v. State, 495 So. 2d 920 (Fla.2d DCA 1986). The supreme court in Holmes stated that the “combined periods [of incarceration and probation] at the time of the original sentence cannot exceed the maximum period of incarceration provided for the offense charged.” [Emphasis added.] 360 So. 2d at 383. We take this to mean that each sentence for a separate offense must be individually considered and fall within the statutory maximum if it is to be upheld. We decline the state’s invitation to treat this sentencing error as harmless on the authority of McDowell v. State, 491 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986), approved in part, quashed in part, 509 So. 2d 927 (Fla. 1987).
Appellant’s sentences for these four counts are VACATED and this cause is REMANDED for resentencing.
SHIVERS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur. . The Committee Note to Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(12) states in part:
If a split sentence is imposed (i.e., a combination of state prison and probation supervision), the incarcerative portion imposed shall not be less than the minimum of the guideline range nor exceed the maximum of the range. The total sanction (incarceration and probation) shall not exceed the term provided by general law.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Landa Williams v. State, 556 So. 2d 799 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)…periods of incarceration and probation at the time of the original sentence cannot exceed the maximum period of incarceration provided by statute for the offense charged. State v. Holmes, 360 So. 2d 380 (Fla.1978). Furthermore, in Littles v. State, 515 So. 2d 401 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), the court held that Holmes’ holding that “the combined periods [of incarceration and probation] at the time of the original sentence cannot exceed the maximum period of incarceration provided for the offense charged,” [emphasis…
-
Sammie Hall v. State, 631 So. 2d 374 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…e for refusal to sign a noncriminal traffic citation and remand for resentencing on that count because the one-year sentence imposed exceeds the authorized statutory maximum. See § 318.14(3), Fla.Stats. (1991); id. § 775.082(4)(b); Littles v. State, 515 So. 2d 401, 402 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). Appellant’s convictions and remaining sentences are affirmed: SMITH, ALLEN and DAVIS, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Holmes, 360 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 1978)
- Lanier v. State, 504 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
- Howland v. State, 420 So. 2d 918 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- Seoane v. State, 491 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
- McDOWELL v. State, 491 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)
- THE Florida BAR v. Mayer Gattegno, 509 So. 2d 927 (Fla. 1987)
- Coleman v. State, 495 So. 2d 920 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)