DONALD MILES SMITH, 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 defendant's convictions are affirmed, but the sentences require correction regarding mandatory minimum terms.
The defendant was convicted of simple robbery and planting a hoax bomb and received sentences with three-year minimum mandatory terms for each offense…
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 Simple Robbery cases and more on FLexlaw
[*265] THREADGILL, Judge.
Smith appeals his judgments and sentences for simple robbery and planting a hoax bomb. We affirm Smith’s convictions, but remand to the trial court to correct the sentences. Smith was sentenced to four and one-half years’ imprisonment for each offense with a three-year minimum mandatory term for each offense. There is no statutory authority for imposing a three-year minimum mandatory sentence for simple robbery. However, the statute in effect at the time of Smith’s offense that prohibited planting a hoax bomb, section 790.165(3), Florida Statutes, (1991), mandates a three-year minimum term of imprisonment for violating subsection (3) of the statute.1
We affirm both convictions and sentences of four and one-half years. We remand to the trial court to strike the three-year minimum mandatory sentence imposed on the robbery conviction and to correct the written sentence for planting a hoax bomb to reflect that a minimum mandatory sentence of three years is imposed pursuant to section 790.165(3), Florida Statutes (1991) and not section 775.087(2) as indicated on the written sentence.
Affirmed; remanded.
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and PATTERSON, J., concur. . The minimum mandatory provision of the statute was deleted by chapter 93-406, section 20, Laws of Florida, and provided for applicability to offenses committed on or after January 1, 1994. This offense was committed in 1993.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jones v. State, 872 So. 2d 938 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…286 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Stephens v. State, 627 So. 2d 543, 544 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). . Kendrick v. State, 817 So. 2d 951 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Williams v. State, 782 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 805 So. 2d 811 (Fla.2001); Smith v. State, 654 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (holding that there must be statutory authority for imposition of mandatory minimum sentence); see also Carter v. State, 786 So. 2d 1173, 1181 (Fla.2001) (“[A] sentence is ‘illegal' if it ‘imposes a kind of punishment that no judg…
-
Fillyaw v. State, 853 So. 2d 590 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…, 286 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Stephens v. State, 627 So. 2d 543, 544 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). .Kendrick v. State, 817 So. 2d 951 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Williams v. State, 782 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 805 So. 2d 811 (Fla.2001); Smith v. State, 654 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (holding that there must be statutory authority for imposition of minimum mandatory sentence); see also Carter v. State, 786 So. 2d 1173, 1181 (Fla.2001) ("[A] sentence is 'illegal' if it ‘imposes a kind of punishment that no judg…