JETAVIOUS YOUNG, A/K/A JETAVIUS KEON YOUNG, 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.
Jetavious Young appeals the revocation of his probation and resulting life sentence for home-invasion robbery, as well as his convictions for robbery charges in a separate case. The court affirms all judgments but identifies a potential sentencing error in the probation revocation case that was not preserved for appeal, allowing Young to pursue relief through a postconviction motion.
The court found potential sentencing error in the life sentence imposed for the probation violation but affirmed all judgments without prejudice because Young failed to preserve the issue for appeal. The court found no error regarding the evidentiary claim or the motion to sever.
[1] A sentence imposed for a substantive violation of probation by a youthful offender cannot exceed the maximum sentence for the offense for which the offender was found gui…
[2] A sentencing error that is not preserved by objection at sentencing or by a rule 3.800(b) motion cannot be addressed on direct appeal.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“[N]o youthful offender shall be committed to the custody of the [D]epartment [of Corrections] for a substantive violation [of probation] for a period longer than the maximum sentence for the offense for which he or she was found guilty.”
Establishes the statutory limitation on sentences for probation violations by youthful offenders
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceYoung was adjudicated guilty of first-degree home-invasion robbery on October 29, 2003, and initially sentenced as a youthful offender to four years' …
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 Evidentiary Error cases and more on FLexlaw
WALLACE, Judge.
Jetavious Young appeals the revocation of his probation and resulting sentence for home-invasion robbery with a firearm in circuit court case number CF02-06478A-XX. In circuit court ease number CF06-007091-XX, Mr. Young appeals his judgments and sentences for robbery and robbery with a firearm. Mr. Young’s ap pellate counsel filed an Anders1 brief suggesting the possibility of an evidentiary error and an error in the denial of a motion to sever the two robbery charges in case number CF06-007091-XX. Appellate counsel also suggests the possibility of sentencing errors in both cases. We have carefully reviewed the record and find no error concerning the first two issues.
However, we do detect error in the sentence imposed for the violation of probation in case number CF02-06478A-XX. Because this error has not been preserved, we affirm without prejudice to Mr. Young’s right to file an appropriate postconviction motion.
On October 29, 2003, Mr. Young was adjudicated guilty in case number CF02-06478A-XX of the first-degree felony of home-invasion robbery, a violation of section 812.135, Florida Statutes (2002). The date of the alleged offense was August 7, 2002. Mr. Young was initially sentenced as a youthful offender to four years’ imprisonment followed by two years’ probation.
On August 24, 2007, the trial court revoked Mr. Young’s probation based on his conviction for two robberies committed while he was on probation and sentenced him to life in prison. The sentence of life imprisonment in case number CF02-06478A-XX constitutes sentencing error. “[N]o youthful offender shall be committed to the custody of the [Djepartment [of Corrections] for a substantive violation [of probation] for a period longer than the maximum sentence for the offense for which he or she was found guilty.” § 958.14, Fla. Stat. (2002).
At the time Mr. Young committed the original offense, home-invasion robbery was a first-degree felony punishable by a maximum sentence of thirty years’ imprisonment. §§ 775.082(3)(b), 812.135(2), Fla. Stat. (2002).
Because the trial court sentenced Mr. Young to life in prison rather than the maximum sentence of thirty years, the trial court may have imposed an illegal sentence. See Rogers v. State, 972 So. 2d 1017, 1019-20 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).
However, we may not address this sentencing error on direct appeal because Mr. Young did not preserve this issue for appellate review by objecting during the sentencing hearing or by filing a motion in accordance with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b). Fla. R.App. P. 9.140(e); see Jackson v. State, 983 So. 2d 562 (Fla.2008); Brannon v. State, 850 So. 2d 452 (Fla.2003). Accordingly, we affirm Mr. Young’s judgments and sentences without prejudice to any right he may have to file an appropriate postconviction motion addressing the unauthorized sentence for his violation of probation in case number CF02-06478A-XX.
Affirmed.
WHATLEY and STRINGER, JJ., concur. . Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Quarra Woodard v. State, 6 So. 3d 726 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…ile a motion to correct sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 3.800(b). Accordingly, we affirm without prejudice to any right Woodard may have to file an appropriate postconviction motion addressing this issue. See Young v. State, 988 So. 2d 1128, 1129 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (affirming Anders appeal without prejudice to any right the defendant had to file an appropriate postconviction motion to address an unpreserved sentencing error). Affirmed. CASANUEVA and KELLY, JJ., Concur.…
-
Vidana v. State, 313 So. 3d 206 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021)…19-CF-3904 without prejudice to any right Vidana may have to file an appropriate postconviction motion with respect to his ten- year minimum mandatory sentence for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in case 19-CF-3904. See Young v. State, 988 So. 2d 1128, 1129 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). Affirmed and remanded. NORTHCUTT and VILLANTI, JJ., Concur.…
-
Hilliard v. State, 6 So. 3d 727 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…he sentences. However, they also acknowledge that neither Hilliard nor the State preserved the errors for appeal by objecting or filing a motion to correct sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Proce [*728] dure 3.800(b). See Young v. State, 988 So. 2d 1128, 1129 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (noting that the defendant failed to preserve a sentencing error for appellate review by not objecting during sentencing or filing a motion pursuant to rule 3.800(b)); State v. Hamner, 816 So. 2d 810, 812 (Fla. 6th DCA 2002)…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Jackson v. State, 983 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 2008)
- Brannon v. State, 850 So. 2d 452 (Fla. 2003)
- MacIer v. In re Est. OF Bessie Giamportone, 972 So. 2d 1017 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)
- Rogers v. State, 972 So. 2d 1017 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)