EDDIE TORRES, JR., 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.
Court affirmed probation revocation but remanded for credit for pre-violation prison time on one count, and rejected constitutional challenges to habitual felony offender sentencing statute.
A defendant is entitled to credit for prison time served on one count prior to probation violation, but not for forfeited gain time.
[1] A defendant is entitled to credit for prison time served on one count prior to probation violation, but forfeited gain time need not be credited.
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“Appellant is not entitled to credit for gain time forfeited by reason of his violation of probation.”
Court explaining the limits of credit for time served, citing statutory provisions.
Torres was convicted in multiple circuit court cases and had probation revoked. He challenged both the denial of prison time credit on one count and h…
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 Arbitrary And Capricious Application cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Eddie Torres, Jr., appeals final judgments and probation revocation orders in several circuit court cases, raising two contentions. First, he contends that, in revoking probation and imposing sentence on count II in circuit court case no. 91-2037, the court erroneously failed to allow credit for prison time he served on count I prior to violating probation as required by Tripp v. State, 622 So. 2d 941 (Fla.1993). We agree and remand for modification of that sentence to allow such credit in compliance with Tripp; however, Appellant is not entitled to credit for gain time forfeited by reason of his violation of probation. See §§ 944.28(1) and 948.06(6), Fla. Stat. (1991); Bradley v. State, 616 So. 2d 1156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).
Second, Torres contends that his habitual felony offender sentence imposed in circuit court ease no. 92-1877 should be reversed because section 775.084, Florida Statutes, denies equal protection of law; is constitutionally inequitable, irrational, vague and subject to arbitrary and capricious application; provides no due process of law; and violates the principle of separation of power. These arguments have repeatedly been rejected and are meritless. E.g., Ross v. State, 601 So. 2d 1190 (Fla.1992); London v. State, 623 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Barber v. State, 564 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 576 So. 2d 284 (Fla.1990).
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.
ZEHMER, C.J., and ERVIN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Tripp v. State, 622 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 1993)
- Barber v. State, 564 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Ross v. State, 601 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 1992)
- London v. State, 623 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)
- L.C. Bradley v. State, 616 So. 2d 1156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)