PAUL THOMAS A/K/A HAROLD F. BURR, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Probation Violation Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
DAUKSCH, Judge.
This is an appeal from a sentence imposed after violation of probation. The pertinent facts here are similar to those in Wilson v. State, 603 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 5th DCA1992). The sentencing court did not give full credit to this appellant for all time served, both pre-violation and pending sentence for violation. Therefore, we must vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing. Sentencing is the obligation of the court, not the department of corrections; so any reliance upon the jailers to compute properly the time served is an improper relinquishment of authority and duty of the judiciary to the executive.
This is not to say that the court cannot consider input from the department, or appellant for that matter, before final computation and determination of the credit for time served.
SENTENCE VACATED; REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.
GOSHORN, C.J., and DIAMANTIS, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Forbes v. Singletary, 684 So. 2d 173 (Fla. 1996)…CREDIT _X_ It is further ordered that the Defendant be allowed credit for all time previously served on this count in the Department of Corrections prior to resentenc-ing. Sentencing is the obligation of the court rather than DOC. Thomas v. State, 612 So. 2d 684, 684 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). Thus, we can understand DOC’s reluctance to take a position contrary to its interpretation of the sentencing order. Yet, judges are required to render sentences according to law. When Forbes was sentenced, our opinion in Gr…
-
Pearson v. Moore, 767 So. 2d 1235 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…cks the authority to correct an illegal sentence or render the illegality harmless.”); Wilson, 603 So. 2d at 94; see also Hudson, 682 So. 2d at 658 n. 1. Sentencing is a power, obligation, and prerogative of the courts, not DOC. See Thomas v. State, 612 So. 2d 684, 684 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Wilson, 603 So. 2d at 94. Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of certiorari, quash the order below, and remand for further proceedings. If the allegations of the petition for writ of mandamus are proven, the writ s…
-
Green v. State, 636 So. 2d 830 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)…d even by the diligence of the Department. We did not find error in the fact that the Department (instead of the court) was permitted to look up the amount of gain time previously earned. It is not possible from the stated facts in Thomas v. State, 612 So. 2d 684 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993), to determine if the trial judge actually awarded credit for previous incarceration (including gain time) and only permitted the Department to “add up” the days (which would be similar to our case) or if the court failed to award…
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
- Wilson v. State, 603 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)