BOBBY ADAMS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1992-12-16
No. 91-00048
SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and PARKER, J., concur.
609 So. 2d 176 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1992) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

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.

Holding

The court held that the trial court erred in its impression that life sentences were mandatory and in sentencing the appellant as a habitual violent felony offender for probation violations. The case is remanded for resentencing.

Facts & Procedural History

The appellant was sentenced as a habitual offender. He contended the trial court believed life sentences were mandatory and that he was improperly sen…

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.

Topics
Habitual Violent Felony Offender Sentencing Discretion Habitual Offender Sentencing Violation Of Probation

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Habitual Violent Felony Offender cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
HALL, Judge.

HALL, Judge.

The appellant, Bobby Adams, contends that the trial court was under the erroneous impression that it was required to impose life sentences due to Adams’s habitual offender status. He further contends that the trial court erred when it sentenced him as a habitual violent felony offender as to his convictions relating to his violation of probation. We agree with both contentions.

The state concedes that the trial judge may not have understood that life sentences imposed pursuant to section 775.-084(4)(b), Florida Statutes (1989), were discretionary. The state also concedes that the sentencing order erroneously indicates Adams to be a habitual violent felony offender relative to the convictions for which he was originally placed on probation.

We therefore remand the case for correction of the written sentencing order to conform to the trial court’s oral pronouncement as to Adams’s violation of probation convictions. The cause is further remanded for resentencing of Adams pursuant to Burdick v. State, 594 So. 2d 267 (Fla.1992).

Accordingly, the case is remanded with directions consistent with this opinion.

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and PARKER, J., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Adams v. State, 658 So. 2d 1113 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
    …irst time upon revocation of probation. We also reversed the sentences in case number 90-6148 because the trial court mistakenly thought it must impose life terms upon declaring Mr. Adams to be a habitual violent felony offender. See Adams v. State, 609 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). On remand, the trial court sentenced Mr. Adams to life imprisonment in case number 87-2873 and deleted the reference to the habitual felony offender classification in that case. It once again imposed life sentences for the 1990…
  • Adams v. State, 775 So. 2d 385 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
    …appealed the sentences for these crimes, and this court reversed for resen-tencing because the trial court may not have understood that life sentences imposed pursuant to the habitual violent offender statute were discretionary. See Adams v. State, 609 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Upon remand, in 1993, the trial court once again imposed life sentences. [*386] In 1997, Adams filed his rule 3.850 motion claiming the sentences for these offenses were illegal.3 In his motion, Adams challenged his sentences on…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw