GEORGE DAVID ALBACH, 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.
The court held that the original sentence imposed for a probation violation was an improper hybrid habitual offender sentence and must be reversed.
Defendant pleaded guilty to a felony battery charge and was sentenced to prison followed by probation with habitual offender status imposed only for t…
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 Habitual Offender Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
FULMER, Judge.
Defendant challenges the sentence imposed upon him after revocation of probation. We reverse.
In 1991 Defendant pleaded guilty to a felony battery charge in Case #91-5758. He was sentenced to prison followed by probation. The trial court imposed habitual offender status for only the probation part of the sentence.
While on probation, Defendant committed several new offenses. He pleaded no contest to those charges in Case # 91-17692.
Defendant was sentenced to ten years imprisonment as a habitual offender in Case #91-17692 and to a concurrent ten year sentence for the probation violation in Case #91-5758. Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal from the imposition of the sentences.
The sentence originally imposed in Case # 91-5758 (incarceration without habitual offender status followed by probation with habitual offender status) was an improper “hybrid” habitual offender sentence. Burrell v. State, 610 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).
We reverse the sentence in Case # 91-5758. Because Defendant has already completed the prison portion of that sentence, upon remand the court must impose a guideline sentence, with the discretion to impose a one cell increase for violation of probation. Thompson v. State, 618 So. 2d 335 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). The sentence in Case #91-17692 is affirmed.
THREADGILL, A.C.J., and PATTERSON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Oney J. Stephenson v. State, 737 So. 2d 1154 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)…violation of probation and multiple violations, the trial judge has discretion to “bump up” the sentence for the second crime.3 See Williams v. State, 594 So. 2d 273, 274 (Fla.1992); Shaw v. State, 637 So. 2d 254 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Attach v. State, 634 So. 2d 254 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). Sentence VACATED; REMANDED for resentencing. GRIFFIN, C.J., and ANTOON, J., concur. . § 800.04(4), Fla. Stat. (1993). . § 800.04(1), Fla. Stat. (1993). . Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.701(d)14.…
Authorities Cited
- Rolland Allen Burrell v. State, 610 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)
- Thompson v. State, 618 So. 2d 335 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)