DANNY RAY STEPHENS, 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 for grand theft of motor vehicle but reversed sentences because the combined imprisonment and community control terms exceeded the statutory five-year maximum for third-degree felony.
A sentence combining imprisonment and community control that exceeds the statutory maximum for the offense is invalid even if the incarcerative portion alone is within limits.
[1] A sentence imposed upon probation revocation that combines imprisonment and community control must not exceed the statutory maximum penalty for the offense, even if the i…
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“A guidelines sentence, which includes the incarcerative portion of the sentence and the probationary or community control period, may not exceed the statutory maximum for the offense.”
Court explaining the legal standard for sentencing in probation revocation cases.
Stephens was convicted of two counts of grand theft of a motor vehicle and his probation was revoked. The trial court sentenced him to four years impr…
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 Grand Theft Of A Motor Vehicle cases and more on FLexlaw
THREADGILL, Chief Judge.
Danny Ray Stephens appeals the sentences imposed upon the revocation of his probation for two counts of grand theft of a motor vehicle, in violation of section 812.014(2)(c)4., Florida Statutes (1989). His attorney filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), asserting that no meritorious grounds exist to support the appeal. Our independent review of the record reveals that the sentences imposed exceed the statutory maximum. We affirm the revocation of probation, but reverse and remand for resentencing.
Grand theft of a motor vehicle is a third-degree felony punishable by a term of imprisonment not exceeding five years. §§ 775.082, 812.014(2)(e)4., Fla. Stat. (1989). The trial court sentenced Mr. Stephens to concurrent terms of four years in prison followed by eighteen months’ community control on each count. A guidelines sentence, which includes the incarcerative portion of the sentence and the probationary or community control period, may not exceed the statutory maximum for the offense. Garcia v. State, 666 So. 2d 231 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Walker v. State, 652 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). Because each sentence of four years’ imprisonment followed by eighteen months’ community control exceeds the five-year statutory maximum, we reverse and remand for resentencing.
Reversed.
PARKER and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Goutier v. State, 692 So. 2d 978 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…tier to thirty years in prison, followed by ten years’ probation. In a split sentence such as this one, the combined number of years of incarceration and probation cannot exceed the statutory maximum. Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.701(d)(12); Stephens v. State, 677 So. 2d 1325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). Therefore, Goutier must be resentenced on this count. Goutier also asserts that he was scored eighty victim-injury points in contravention of the dictates of Karchesky v. State, 591 So. 2d 930 (Fla.1992). The factual basis reci…
-
Landeverde v. State, 769 So. 2d 457 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…violation of probation, based on a reason that would have supported departure had the judge initially sentenced the defendant rather than plac [*464] ing him or her on probation. See Williams v. State, 581 So. 2d 144 (Fla.1991); Routenberg v. State, 677 So. 2d 1325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). These and other sentencing scenarios demonstrate that a probation or community control placement is not a “fixed” or final sentence as contemplated by Mitchell,4 So long as the trial court retains jurisdiction and control over a…
-
Routenburg v. State, 802 So. 2d 361 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…resentenced under a corrected score-sheet. Id. at 44. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. BLUE, C.J., and DAVIS, J., Concur. . Routenberg's sentence on the violation of probation was twice overturned on appeal. Routenberg v. State, 677 So. 2d 1325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Routenberg v. State, 721 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). . Resolution of the Karchesky issue allows a very narrow exception to the general rule that evidentiary hearings are not permitted in addressing motions filed pursuant to…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Walker v. State, 652 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- Garcia v. State, 666 So. 2d 231 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)