LEE ROY DE LOACH, ALIAS LEE DELONACH, 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.
Lee Roy DeLoach was convicted of larceny of an automobile. The trial court deferred sentencing from May 14-27, 1958, then imposed a 5-year sentence. The appellate court affirmed the conviction but modified the sentence to grant DeLoach credit for the 13-day deferment period under the principle established in Batch v. State.
The conviction was properly charged and supported by adequate evidence. DeLoach must be given credit for the 13-day period of suspended sentencing from May 14 to May 27, 1958, applied to his 5-year sentence.
“the charge on which the appellant was convicted was properly laid in the information, and the record of the trial shows that the finding of guilt had adequate evidentiary basis and support”
Establishes that the conviction was substantively proper and supported by evidence
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDeLoach and William Hoyt Hammond were charged with larceny of an automobile and using a vehicle without the owner's consent. At trial, DeLoach was fou…
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 Larceny Of An Automobile cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant, along with one William Hoyt Hammond, was charged in an information with larceny of an automobile and with using a vehicle without the owner’s consent, to which he pleaded not guilty. On the trial, appellant was found not guilty of the latter offense, but was convicted of the former.
On May 12, 1958, the court entered an order adjudging the appellant guilty of “Larceny of Automobile”. That order contained no sentence. In a later order, on May 14, 1958, the court deferred the passing of sentence indefinitely, saying: “It is Further Considered, Ordered and Adjudged that as to you, Lee Roy DeLoach, alias Lee Delonach the passing of sentence be, and the same is, hereby suspended from day to day and term to term until the further order of this Court.”
The record discloses that an alias capias was issued for appellant, who was then brought before the court on May 27, 1958, and sentenced to be confined at hard labor in the state penitentiary for a term of 5 years.
The deferment of sentence on May 14 was on the appellant’s request that the court “give him a break” by letting him go back to Georgia. However, he remained here, and some days later was picked up on suspicion of attempted auto theft.
Appellant took and perfected his appeal in proper person. We have considered his assignments of error and the points raised in the appellant’s brief, in the light of the record and the law applicable to the case, and no reversible error has been made to appear. No useful purpose would be served by enumeration and discussion of those matters here. The charge .on which the appellant was convicted was properly laid in the information, and the record of the trial shows that the finding of guilt had adequate eviden-tiary basis and support.
However, on authority of Bateh v. State, Fla.App.1958, 101 So.2d 869, decided recently by the district court of appeal in the first district, the appellant, on ’ the 5 year term of his sentence, must be given credit as having served the time of the indefinite deferment of his sentencing, being the period from May 14 to May 27, 1958, amounting to 13 days. With that modification, the judgment appealed from is hereby affirmed.
It is so ordered.
CARROLL, CHAS., C. J., and HORTON and PEARSON, JJ., concur, ;