DOMINIC DEANGELO NEALY, 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.
Dominic Nealy's community control sentence expired in August 2011, but the trial court attempted to revoke it based on alleged violations in May 2012, nine months after expiration. The court reversed the revocation and remanded for vacation of the order and dismissal of the violation affidavit, finding the trial court lacked jurisdiction to revoke community control that had already expired.
The trial court lacked jurisdiction to revoke community control that had already expired. Because Nealy's community control ended in August 2011 and the alleged violations occurred in May 2012, he could only have been serving probation at the time of the alleged violations, making revocation of expired community control improper.
[1] A trial court lacks jurisdiction to revoke community control if the revocation proceedings are initiated after the period of community control has expired.
[2] A court order that incorrectly extends community control beyond its statutory maximum period is void as to the extended portion.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Because the revocation process did not begin until ... after Ermatinger's period of community control expired, the trial court was without jurisdiction to revoke his community control.”
Cited precedent establishing the legal principle that a trial court lacks jurisdiction to revoke community control after the period has expired
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 2008, Nealy pleaded no contest to felony battery and received three years probation. After violating probation, he was placed on two years of commu…
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 Revocation Of Community Control cases and more on FLexlaw
Dominic Nealy challenges the revocation of his community control and the sixty-month prison sentence for felony battery entered as a result of that revocation. As the State properly concedes, Mr. Nealy’s community control was completed before the revocation proceedings were initiated and it was error to revoke it. We therefore reverse the order of revocation and remand for the trial court to immediately vacate the order and resulting sentence and to dismiss the affidavit of violation of community control.
In 2008 Mr. Nealy pleaded no contest to felony battery and was sentenced to three years of probation. He violated this probation, and on or about August 17, 2009, he was placed on two years of community control to be followed by one year of probation. On September 14, 2011, following the expiration of the two-year community control portion of his sentence, he was alleged to have violated the conditions of his community control by committing a new law violation. On March 9, 2012, following an admission to the alleged violation, the trial court found that Mr. Nealy had violated the terms of his community control and extended his probation for one additional year.1 Mr. Nealy did not appeal the May 30, 2012, order modifying his community control entered after these proceedings.
On May 31, 2012, Mr. Nealy was alleged to have violated certain technical terms specifically associated with community control. Following a hearing he was found to have violated those terms and he was sentenced to five years in prison. The State *694properly has conceded that this was error because, despite the May 30, 2012, order, Mr. Nealy’s community control actually ended in August 2011, approximately nine months before the alleged violations.2 Therefore, because he could not have been serving anything more than probation at that time, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to revoke his community control based on the May 2012 allegation. See Ermatinger v. State, 866 So.2d 698, 699 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (“Because the revocation process did not begin until ... after Ermatinger’s period of community control expired, the trial court was without jurisdiction to revoke his community control.”). Accordingly, we reverse the revocation of Mr. Nealy’s community control and remand for the trial court to immediately vacate the order of revocation and the resulting sentence and to dismiss the affidavit of violation of community control. Mr. Nealy is entitled to be immediately released from any prison sentence he is serving for the conviction associated with this opinion.
Reversed and remanded.
CASANUEVA and KHOUZAM, JJ., Concur.