DENNIS MERRILL DEAL, 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.
Dennis Merrill Deal appealed the revocation of his probation and multiple sentences imposed on revocation following his 2000 guilty plea to sexual offense counts. The court affirmed the revocation and thirty-year sentence for count one, but reversed sentences on other counts because the trial court lacked jurisdiction to impose new sentences after Deal had completed his probationary terms on those counts.
The trial court had jurisdiction to revoke and reimpose a sentence for count one, but lacked jurisdiction to impose sentences on counts five, six, eight, ten, and twenty-one because Deal had completed his probationary sentences on those counts before the affidavit was filed.
[1] A trial court lacks jurisdiction to impose new sentences on counts for which a defendant has completed their probationary sentences.
[2] Probationary sentences that expire before the filing of an affidavit of violation cannot be the basis for revocation or imposition of new sentences.
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“the trial court lacked jurisdiction to impose new sentences on the counts for which Mr. Deal had completed his probationary sentences”
Establishes the core jurisdictional principle that expired probationary terms preclude revocation and resentencing.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDeal pleaded guilty in March 2000 to six counts of sexual offenses and received thirteen years' imprisonment followed by ten years' probation on count…
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 Expiration Of Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
Dennis Merrill Deal appeals the order revoking his probation and the numerous sentences imposed on revocation. We affirm the order of revocation as to count one without comment. We also affirm his thirty-year sentence for count one. Because his terms of probation on several other counts expired before the State filed the affidavit of violation, we reverse other sentences as explained below.
The State filed an information against Mr. Deal in July 1999. That information contained twenty-one counts for sexual offenses occurring between 1995 and 1999. In March 2000, Mr. Deal pleaded guilty to counts one, five, six, eight, ten, and twenty-one. The State agreed to dismiss the remaining fifteen counts. Mr. Deal was sentenced to thirteen years’ imprisonment on all of the counts to which he pleaded. Following the period of imprisonment, he was sentenced to ten years’ probation on count one and to two years’ probation on counts five, six, eight, ten, and twenty-one. He went to prison and was released in August 2010.
Although Mr. Deal’s probation was modified on two occasions during the two years that followed, it was never revoked or extended. The sentences on appeal were imposed based on an affidavit filed in August 2013. By that time, Mr. Deal had completed serving his probationary sentences on all counts except for count one. Accordingly, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to impose new sentences on the counts for which Mr. Deal had completed his probationary sentences. See Morgan v. State, 757 So.2d 618 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). As a result, we affirm the thirty-year sentence imposed for count one, but we reverse the sentences imposed on counts five, six, eight, ten, and twenty-one. On remand, the trial court shall enter an order vacating these sentences and it shall also modify the order of revocation as needed to adjust for this reversal. The trial court shall direct the circuit court clerk to send the Department of Corrections certified copies of the order vacating the sentences and any revised sentences entered by the trial court on remand.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with directions.
CRENSHAW and MORRIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Stump v. State, 238 So. 3d 899 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018)…ity control on count one and was serving sexual offender probation on other counts. Because he had already completed his sentence on count one, the trial court did not have jurisdiction to impose a new sentence on that count. See Deal v. State, 162 So. 3d 282, 282 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (stating that "the trial court lacked jurisdiction to impose new sentences on the counts for which Mr. Deal had completed his probationary sentences"). Therefore, we reverse the sentence on count one and direct the trial…
Authorities Cited
- Elvin Otis Morgan v. State, 757 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)