DERRICK LEROY GREEN, 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 affirmed the trial court's adjudication that Green violated probation and imposed concurrent sentences, rejecting all of Green's pro se arguments including claims regarding warrant sufficiency, statute of limitations, incarceration credit, plea agreement breach, ineffective assistance of counsel, and double jeopardy.
The trial court's adjudication of probation violation and concurrent sentences are affirmed because Green's arguments lack merit.
Green was on probation and was arrested on a felony warrant issued in 1993 pursuant to the 1992-1994 version of section 948.06, Florida Statutes. He r…
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 Tolling Of Probationary Period cases and more on FLexlaw
We affirm the trial court’s adjudication of Defendant, Green, being in violation of probation and the concurrent sentences. The public defender has filed a motion and *253brief to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and by separate order we grant that motion.
Green has filed his own pro se brief, in which he raises the following grounds for reversal of the trial court’s order and sentence: (1) The affidavit and felony warrant issued in 1993 in accordance with the 1992-1994 version of section 948.06, Florida Statutes, was insufficient to toll probation; (2) The felony warrant statute of limitations applies to a violation of probation arrest warrant; (3) Green is entitled to incarceration credit from September 1, 1994, to January 26, 2008; (4) The State violated the negotiated plea agreement referenced at the March 17, 2008, February 6, 2009, and March 3, 2009 hearings; (5) Ineffective assistance of counsel; and (6) Double jeopardy.
We have thoroughly reviewed each of the grounds raised by Green, and the citations of authority that he has offered in support of those arguments. We find each argument to be without merit and most of the cases cited to be inapplicable. Accordingly, we find no error in the trial court’s determination of violation of probation and the sentence imposed thereon. Accordingly, we affirm without prejudice to file a motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, if Green can in good faith do so.
Affirmed,.
POLEN, HAZOURI and CIKLIN, JJ„ concur.