NICOLE VELASCO, 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.
Appellate court reversed denial of motion to correct illegal sentence, holding that trial court erred by failing to continue defendant's youthful offender designation upon resentencing for probation violation, though sentence length itself was lawful.
A trial court must continue a defendant's youthful offender status upon resentencing after a probation violation, even though the sentence length may exceed the six-year youthful offender limit.
[1] A youthful offender's status must be continued upon resentencing for a probation violation, even if the new sentence exceeds the six-year limit otherwise applicable to yo…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“Once a circuit court has imposed a youthful offender sentence, it must continue that status upon resentencing after a violation of probation or community control.”
Court citing Lee v. State for the rule that youthful offender status must be maintained upon resentencing.
Nicole Velasco, a youthful offender, violated her probation by committing a new offense and was resentenced. The trial court imposed a sentence exceed…
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 Youthful Offender Designation cases and more on FLexlaw
Nicole Velasco appeals the order summarily denying her motion to correct illegal sentence filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We find no merit to her argument that the length of her sentence is illegal. See Yegge v. State, 88 So.3d 1058, 1059 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (holding that a youthful offender who commits a substantive violation of probation, such as by committing a new offense, can be sentenced up to the maximum sentence for the original offense; the six-year sentence limit for youthful offenders is no longer applicable). However, we agree that the trial court erred in failing to continue Ms. Velasco’s designation as a youthful offender. See Tidwell v. State, 74 So.3d 503 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) (holding that one’s status as a youthful offender cannot be revoked based on a violation of probation); Lee v. State, 67 So.3d 1199, 1202 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) (“ ‘Once a circuit court has imposed a youthful offender sentence, it must continue that status upon resen-tencing after a violation of probation or community control.’ ” (quoting Blacker v. State, 49 So.3d 785, 788 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010))). Accordingly, we reverse the post-conviction court’s order and remand for amendment of Ms. Velasco’s sentence to reflect her youthful offender status.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
NORTHCUTT and VILLANTI, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- LEE v. State, 67 So. 3d 1199 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)
- Blacker v. State, 49 So. 3d 785 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)
- Yegge v. State, 88 So. 3d 1058 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)
- Tidwell v. State, 74 So. 3d 503 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)