CLAYTON DALE COUNTS, 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 probationary term imposed exceeded the original suspended portion of the true split sentence, requiring it to be stricken.
Clayton Counts received a true split sentence with a prison term and a probationary term. Upon violation, the court imposed a new sentence that includ…
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 Probationary Term cases and more on FLexlaw
PATTERSON, Chief Judge.
Clayton Counts challenges the sentences imposed upon revocation of the probationary term of his true split sentence. We reverse the probationary portion of Counts’ sentence in case number 86-15050 and direct the trial court to strike the probationary term.
Counts was originally sentenced pursuant to a plea agreement for offenses committed in 1984 and 1986 to a concurrent term of thirty years in prison, suspended after eighteen years, with the remaining twelve years to be served on probation, in case numbers 86-11405, 86-12327, and 86-15050. Upon a violation of probation, Counts received concurrent sentences of twelve years in prison in case numbers 86-11405 and 86-12327 and twelve years in prison followed by twelve years’ probation in case number 86-15050.
The State concedes that the trial court erred in sentencing Counts in case number 86-15050 because the total sentence imposed of twelve years in prison followed by twelve years’ probation exceeds the original twelve-year suspended portion of Counts’ true split sentence. See Poore v. State, 531 So. 2d 161 (Fla.1988); Silva v. State, 602 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). We reverse the probationary portion of the sentence in case number 86-15050 and remand for the trial court to strike the twelve years’ probation from that sentence. On remand, it is unnecessary for Counts to be present. In all other respects, we affirm Counts’ sentences.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
GREEN and DAVIS, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Poore v. State, 531 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1988)
- Gerrard D. Jones v. State, 602 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)
- Silva v. State, 602 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)