STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
KARIM VEDACE, 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 Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a sentencing imposed on a youthful offender who received a split sentence combining withheld adjudication with incarceration exceeding 364 days. Under Florida law, a court cannot simultaneously withhold adjudication and impose a prison sentence as a condition of probation that exceeds 364 days.
A court was not authorized to simultaneously withhold adjudication and incarcerate the defendant to a term exceeding 364 days as a condition of probation. The sentence was reversed and remanded with instructions that the court may either resentence Vedace as a youthful offender to incarceration or withhold adjudication and sentence him to prison as a condition of probation not exceeding 364 days.
[1] A court may not simultaneously withhold adjudication and incarcerate a youthful offender for a term exceeding 364 days as a condition of probation.
[2] A youthful offender may be sentenced to incarceration or have adjudication withheld and be sentenced to prison as a condition of probation, provided the imprisonment does…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Although the court was authorized to impose the above split sentence pursuant to §958.04(2)(c), Fla Stat. (1997), it was not authorized to simultaneously withhold adjudication and incarcerate Vedace, as a condition of probation, to a term exceeding 364 days.”
Establishes the core legal violation: the statutory prohibition against combining withheld adjudication with incarceration exceeding 364 days as a probation condition.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKarim Vedace entered a plea of no contest to five counts of burglary of a dwelling, four counts of grand theft, and one count of criminal mischief acr…
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 Withheld Adjudication cases and more on FLexlaw
POLEN, J.
The state timely appeals from the sentence imposed in Karim Vedace’s plea of no contest in five different cases1 to five counts of burglary of a dwelling, four counts of grand theft, and one count of criminal mischief. The court treated Vedace as a youthful offender, withheld adjudication, sentenced him to one year and one day in DOC, and ordered two years’ probation in each case. Although the court was authorized to impose the above split sentence pursuant to §958.04(2)(c), Fla Stat. (1997),2 it was not authorized to simultaneously withhold adjudication and incarcerate Vedace, as a condition of probation, to a term exceeding 364 days. See § 958.04(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (1997); State v. Butler, 719 So. 2d 344, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D2187 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)(reversing a sentence under § 958.04(2)(c) which withheld adjudication but sentenced defendant to eighteen months in prison followed by one year’s probation). Accordingly, we reverse and direct that the court, on remand, may either resentence Ve-dace as a youthful offender to incarceration or, alternatively, withhold adjudication and sentence him to prison as a condition of probation so long as imprisonment does not exceed 364 days.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
STEVENSON and HAZOURI, JJ., concur. . LT Case Nos. 97-10148, 97-7424, 97-2282, 97-6899, and 97-6689.
. That statute provides, in pertinent part,
The court may impose a split sentence whereby the youthful offender is to be placed on probation or community control upon completion of any specified period of incarceration; however, if the incarceration period is to be served in a department facility other than a probation and restitution center or community residential facility, such period shall be for not less than I year or more than 4 years.
§ 958.04(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (1997).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Smith v. State, 973 So. 2d 1235 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)…to withhold adjudication on the armed burglary because Smith received more than one year in prison on the original youthful offender sentence imposed in 92-32777-B. As a result, he did not qualify for a withhold of adjudication. See State v. Vedace, 727 So. 2d 1079 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); State v. Davis, 721 So. 2d 1243 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); State v. Oates, 610 So. 2d 522 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). The denial of Smith’s rule 3.800(a) motion is affirmed. WARNER, KLEIN and TAYLOR, JJ„ concur.…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Butler, 719 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)