STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
KEITH BYNES, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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 affirmed the youthful offender sentence but remanded to strike certain probation conditions.
The State appealed a youthful offender sentence imposed on the defendant, arguing a mandatory 20-year sentence should have applied. The defendant cros…
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 Discretionary Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The State appeals the youthful offender sentence imposed on Keith Bynes in lieu of a mandatory 20-year sentence under the “10-20 Life” statute, section 775.087, Florida Statutes (1999). We affirm. See State v. Wooten, No. 2D00-1004, 782 So. 2d 408, 2001 WL 76995 (Fla. 2d DCA filed Jan. 31, 2001).
Mr. Bynes cross-appeals the imposition of certain conditions of probation. Mr. Bynes preserved these errors by filing a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2).1 The State has conceded error. We therefore remand to strike conditions 2, 12 and 19 from the order of probation. Because condition 19 was a discretionary cost that may be reimposed after notice and an opportunity to be heard, the striking of that condition is without prejudice. See Gant v. State, 682 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).
ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and NORTHCUTT and CASANUEVA, JJ., concur. . Even though the State has conceded error, no order was entered on this motion in the circuit court within the allotted sixty days and, thus, the motion was deemed denied. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3 .800(b)(1)(B), (2)(B).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Jignore Oglester, 830 So. 2d 124 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)…we affirm the appel-lee’s sentence. Wooten, 782 So. 2d at 409; Beatrice v. State, No. 01-180 (Fla. 4th DCA July 24, 2002); State v. Fernandez, 819 So. 2d 945 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Darrow v. State, 789 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001); State v. Bynes, 784 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). Affirmed.…
-
Joseph v. Chanin, 940 So. 2d 483 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)…dlington v. Edwards, 92 So. 2d 629, 631 (Fla.1957) (citation omitted). A constructive trust may be imposed against a recipient of funds who has not engaged in the wrongful conduct that justifies the imposition of the trust. See Browning v. Browning, 784 So. 2d 1145, 1148 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). The remedy is “an extraordinary one,” subject to the discretion of the court and traditional equitable defenses. Collinson, 903 So. 2d at 228; see Provence v. Palm Beach Taverns, Inc., 676 So. 2d 1022, 1025 (Fla. 4th DCA 19…
-
Brown v. Poole, 261 So. 3d 708 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Wooten, 782 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)
- Chillington v. State, 682 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)
- Carlo Gant v. State, 682 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)