OLLIE BRYANT, 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 erred by denying the motion without providing record support for its conclusion.
Appellant challenged his sentence as a youthful offender, alleging it exceeded the statutory maximum upon revocation of probation. The trial court den…
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 Substantive Violation Of Probation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Ollie Bryant appeals the denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence. Bryant alleged his 192 month sentence as a youthful offender following revocation of probation was illegal as it exceeded the maximum provided in the youthful offender statute. Chapter 958, Fla. Stat. (1998).
If these allegations are true, then Bryant’s sentence would be illegal and he would be entitled to relief under rule 3.800(a). See Shaw v. State, 826 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Hill v. State, 698 So. 2d 931 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Swilley v. State, 781 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Schebel v. State, 721 So. 2d 1177 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) rev. dism. 723 So. 2d 830 (Fla.1999).
The merit of Bryant’s claim may hinge on whether his violation of probation was substantive or technical. § 958.14, Fla. Stat. (1998); Swilley, 781 So. 2d at 459. The trial court denied the motion stating the sentencing documents showed Bryant was not sentenced as a youthful offender. The trial court failed to provide portions of the record supporting denial or refuting Bryant’s claim he was adjudicated a youthful offender and sentenced in excess of the statutory maximum upon revocation of probation. Collins v. State, 805 So. 2d 73, 74 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).
We reverse and remand for further consideration of Bryant’s claim.
POLEN, STEVENSON and GROSS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bryant v. State, 876 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)…nation that he had violated probation, was sentenced in excess of the Youthful Offender Act. § 958.14, Fla. Stat. (1997). Because the record did not refute Bryant’s claim, we reversed and remanded the case for further consideration. Bryant v. State, 859 So. 2d 1269 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). On remand, the trial court again denied Bryant’s motion attaching portions of the record which demonstrate that Bryant’s violation of probation was a substantive violation. Because the violation was substantive, the court could…
-
Glendon Michael Goelz v. State, 937 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)…y two years probation. Louissaint v. State, 727 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). A sentence that exceeds the maximum allowed by the youthful offender statute is an illegal sentence that can be challenged in a rule 3.800(a) motion. See Bryant v. State, 859 So. 2d 1269 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Kelly; Louissaint; Schebel v. State, 721 So. 2d 1177 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). The circuit court’s order is reversed. On remand, appellant has the option of withdrawing his plea. If he elects not to withdraw his plea, the court mus…
Authorities Cited
- Waymon M. Swilley v. State, 781 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)
- Collins v. State, 805 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)
- Hill v. State, 698 So. 2d 931 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
- State v. Schebel, 723 So. 2d 830 (Fla. 1999)
- Schebel v. State, 721 So. 2d 1177 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Shaw v. State, 826 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)