JEREMY E. LYNN
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 5th DCA | 2022-11-14
No. 22-0617
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2022)

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.

Holding

The State met its burden of proving by greater weight of evidence that the probationer willfully and substantially violated the conditions of his drug offender probation, warranting revocation.

Headnotes

[1] Sentencing errors, including sentences exceeding the statutory cap for the offense and discrepancies between oral pronouncement and written judgment regarding the specifi…

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
Key Quotes

“Concluding that the arguments raised by Lynn for reversal lack merit as the State met its burden of showing by the greater weight of the evidence that Lynn willfully and substantially violated his probation”

Court's initial statement of the disposition and reasoning
Facts & Procedural History

Jeremy E. Lynn was on drug offender probation for third-degree felonies of criminal mischief over $1,000 and possession of a schedule II controlled su…

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.

Topics
Drug Offender Probation Collateral Relief Criminal Punishment Code Willful And Substantial Violation Of Probation

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Drug Offender Probation cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

JEREMY E. LYNN,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D22-617 LT Case No. 2021-302270-CFDB

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

________________________________/

Opinion filed November 14, 2022 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County, Leah R. Case, Judge. Tiffany Gatesh Fearing, of Suncoast Legal Group, P.L., Spring Hill, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Whitney Brown Hartless, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee. PER CURIAM.

In this non-Anders1 appeal, Jeremy E. Lynn challenges the order revoking his drug offender probation after trial and the resulting judgment and sentences imposed by the trial court. Concluding that the arguments raised by Lynn for reversal lack merit as the State met its burden of showing by the greater weight of the evidence that Lynn willfully and substantially violated his probation, see Del Valle v. State, 80 So. 3d 999, 1012 (Fla. 2011), we affirm. Two matters, though, merit brief comment. First, Lynn was on drug offender probation for the third-degree felonies of criminal mischief over $1,0002 and possession of a schedule II substance.3 Upon revoking Lynn’s probation, the trial court orally sentenced him to serve six years in prison, with the written judgment showing the sixyear sentence on each count to be served concurrently. These sentences exceed the five-year statutory cap for third-degree felonies,4 and there is nothing contained in the record, such as the lowest permissible sentence on the Criminal Punishment Code scoresheet showing six years, to explain why

Footnotes
1 Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
2 See § 806.13(1)(b)3., Fla. Stat. (2020).
3 See § 893.13(6)(a), Fla. Stat. (2020).
4 See § 775.082(3)(e), Fla. Stat. (2020). his sentences should exceed five years. See § 921.0024(2), Fla. Stat. (2020). Second, the written order revoking probation cites to a violation of probation that Lynn was not found to have committed by the trial court. The order also does not include the two violations of probation that the court actually found were committed by Lynn. However, because these apparent errors in both the sentence and the revocation order have not been preserved for review on direct appeal by either an objection or a motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b), our affirmance here is without prejudice to Lynn timely filing a motion below seeking collateral relief, as appropriate. See, e.g., Washington v. State, 814 So. 2d 1187, 1189 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). AFFIRMED, without prejudice. LAMBERT, C.J., EVANDER and WALLIS, JJ., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw