MICHAEL T. CALLAHAN, 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.
Michael Callahan was convicted of sale or delivery of a controlled substance and sentenced to probation with a condition suspending his driver's license for five years. The court reversed and remanded, holding that the trial court lacked statutory authority to suspend a driver's license for a drug offense under the applicable version of Florida law, though it could impose a probation condition prohibiting driving or direct license suspension under section 322.27(2).
The trial court did not have authority under chapter 322 as it existed at the time of the offense to suspend Callahan's driver's license for a drug conviction. However, the court may impose a probation condition prohibiting driving during probation, and may direct the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles to suspend the license if the seriousness of the offense warrants it under section 322.27(2).
[1] A trial court lacks the authority to suspend a defendant's driver's license for an offense unrelated to the operation of a motor vehicle, absent specific statutory author…
[2] A trial court may impose a condition of probation prohibiting a defendant from driving during the probationary term, even if it cannot suspend the driver's license itself…
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“the trial court was without the authority to suspend Callahan's driver's license”
Establishes the core holding that the trial court lacked statutory authority under chapter 322 to suspend the license for a drug offense.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCallahan was convicted of sale or delivery of a controlled substance and sentenced to twelve months in county jail (nine months suspended) followed by…
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 Conditions cases and more on FLexlaw
HALL, Acting Chief Judge.
The appellant, Michael Callahan, was convicted of sale or delivery of a controlled substance, sentenced to twelve months in the county jail, nine months of jail sentence suspended, followed by a three-year term of probation. Callahan challenges the condition of his probation suspending his driver’s license for five years. We reverse and remand for correction of the sentence.
Callahan contends that a trial court does not have the authority to revoke or suspend a driver’s license except in such instances where a defendant is convicted of driving under the influence or any other offense regulating the operation of a motor vehicle as specified under sections 322.-28(2)(a) and 322.27(2), Florida Statutes (1987).
We agree with Callahan that under chapter 322 as it existed at the time Callahan committed his offense,1 the trial court was without the authority to suspend Callahan’s driver’s license. Therefore, we reverse and remand for correction of the sentence. On remand the trial court may establish as a condition of probation that Callahan not drive during his term of probation. Moreland v. State, 442 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).
Callahan further contends that the condition suspending his driver’s license must in some way be related to the offense. We cannot tell from the record whether Callahan utilized a motor vehicle in the commission of this crime, but since he did not object to the condition, he did not preserve the issue for our review. See McPike v. State, 473 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).
Even though the 1987 version of chapter 322 limits the power of the trial court to suspend drivers’ licenses, section 322.27(2), Florida Statutes (1987), provides that the trial court may direct the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles to suspend a driver’s license, “when the court feels that the seriousness of the offense and the circumstances surrounding the conviction warrant the suspension of the licensee’s driving privileges.”
Therefore, we affirm Callahan’s judgment, but remand for correction of the sentence to reflect that as a condition of probation Callahan may not drive for the term of probation. If the trial court deems it proper, it may direct the department to suspend Callahan’s license for the term of the sentence.
PARKER and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur. . As of October 1, 1987, the sentencing court may direct the department to revoke for a period of up to two years the driver’s license or driving privilege of any person adjudicated guilty or delinquent of any violation of section 893 involving any substance listed in sections 893.03(1) or (2). § 322.055(1), Fla.Stat. (1987).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Martin v. State, 618 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…od of two years, of any person convicted of possession or sale of a controlled substance. Such revocation of the driving privilege may be imposed as a condition of probation. See Ruise v. State, 552 So. 2d 270 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Callahan v. State, 550 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). Accordingly, we remand the appealed probation order, with directions to strike condition thirteen, purporting to assess $500.00 as additional costs associated with appellant’s cost of supervision in the Bay County Work Program;…
-
Ruise v. State, 552 So. 2d 270 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)…without the authority to actually suspend appellant’s driver’s license, we remand for correction of the sentence to reflect that the Department is directed to revoke appellant’s driving privileges for a period of one year. Compare Callahan v. State, 550 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). SHIVERS, C.J., and WENTWORTH, J., concur.…
-
Frasilus v. State, 840 So. 2d 1117 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…t to direct the Department of Highway and Motor Vehicles to revoke driver's licenses or driving privileges. See Blake v. State, 814 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). . See, e.g., Blair v. State, 554 So. 2d 1226 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Callahan v. State, 550 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989).…
Authorities Cited
- McPIKE v. State, 473 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Moreland v. State, 442 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Dell E. Barfield and Louis W. Barfield v. Bradshaw, 442 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)