HOMER BELL BOOTH, 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 trial court exceeded its sentencing authority by adding a probationary term to the imprisonment term upon revocation of probation.
Booth was placed on probation after pleading guilty to burglary and dealing in stolen property. His probation was revoked, and he was sentenced to imp…
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 Sentencing Authority cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant Booth appeals the sentence imposed after revocation of probation. We reverse.
Following a plea of guilty to one count of burglary and two counts of dealing in stolen property, adjudication was withheld and Booth was placed on probation for five years on each count, to ran concurrently. His probation was later revoked and he was adjudicated guilty on each count. He was then sentenced to imprisonment for three years concurrent on each count, all of which was suspended on the condition he successfully complete five years of probation.
Because he later violated his probation, probation was revoked and he was sentenced to concurrent terms of three years’ imprisonment, to be followed by concurrent terms of three years’ probation. He contends that the trial court exceeded its sentencing authority by adding the probationary term to the three years’ imprisonment, and we agree.
The trial court’s original sentence was a true split sentence. Poore v. State, 531 So. 2d 161 (Fla.1988); Plejdrup v. State, 754 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Evans v. State, 730 So. 2d 768 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). As such, upon revocation of probation, the trial court was limited to resentencing Booth to a period of incarceration which did not exceed the original three year sentence, less credit for time served. See, Plejdrup, supra; Williams v. State, 747 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999).
REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.
ANTOON, C.J., THOMPSON, J., and ORFINGER, M., Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lovett v. State, 795 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)…iginal suspended sentence or for any period within the guidelines, whichever is less. See Poore, 531 So. 2d at 164; Brooks v. State, 762 So. 2d 1011, 1013 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Plejdrup v. State, 754 So. 2d 57, 58 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Booth v. State, 754 So. 2d 155, 156 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Williams v. State, 747 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). We vacate Lovett’s sentence and remand for imposition of a sentence that does not exceed either the guidelines or the suspended portion of the original sentence, which…
Authorities Cited
- Poore v. State, 531 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1988)
- Evans v. State, 730 So. 2d 768 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Williams v. State, 747 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Plejdrup v. State, 754 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)