RONALD MOSLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2014-02-05
No. 4D12-3509
GROSS, CONNER and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.
134 So. 3d 1124 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2014) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Topics
Technical Violation Of Probation Substantive Violation Of Probation Sentencing Cap Youthful Offender Status

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Technical Violation Of Probation cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Ronald Mosley appeals the denial of a petition for writ of habeas corpus. In his petition, Mosley alleged he was entitled to immediate release because upon finding a substantive violation of probation, the court could not revoke his youthful offender status and sentence him to more than six years where he was not convicted of the new substantive crime. There was no error in the court imposing sentences that exceeded the six-year cap that applies to technical violations. St. Cyr v. State, 106 So.3d 487, 489 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013). But, as the state acknowledges, Mosley’s written sentences do not reflect his status as a youthful offender. This may have consequences for him in prison and affect his eligibility for early release. Lachenauer v. State, 117 So.3d 880, 881 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013); Christian v. State, 84 So.3d 437, 443-44 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012). Improper revocation of youthful offender status may *1125be corrected at any time in a rule 3.800(a) motion. Blacker v. State, 49 So.3d 785, 787 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). As a result, we reverse in part and remand for the court to correct the written sentences to reflect appellant’s status as a youthful offender.

GROSS, CONNER and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Jean v. State, 145 So. 3d 900 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)
    …been imposed following revocation of his youthful offender probationary terms. Through several recent opinions, this court has rejected that challenge and explained its reasoning when concluding that comparable terms are legal. See Mosley v. State, 134 So. 3d 1124 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014); Lachenauer v. State, 117 So. 3d 880 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013); Eustache v. State, 83 So. 3d 784 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). Affirmed. CIKLIN, LEVINE and KLINGENSMITH, JJ„ concur.…
  • Johnson v. State, 197 So. 3d 616 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)
    …reserved solely for those .cases wherein the trial court has expressly revoked the youthful offender designation. Rather, it has also been granted where the youthful offender designation is omitted from the sentencing documents. See Mosley v. State, 134 So. 3d 1124, 1124-25 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (concluding that the omission of the defendant’s youthful offender status from his written sentencing documents was an error that could be corrected at any time pursuant to rule 3.800(a)). Accordingly, we reverse and re…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw