ALFONSO STREETER, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
The appellate court affirmed the revocation of probation in one case but reversed it in another because the probation period had expired, rendering the revocation untimely. The court also found that the appellant abandoned assignments of error related to the second case.
The court held that the revocation of probation was invalid in the case where the probation period had expired due to lack of jurisdiction. The court also held that assignments of error not argued in the appellant's brief are abandoned.
“the probation period for Case No. 64 — 9573 had already ended prior to the revocation and that the court, therefore, lacked jurisdiction to impose further sentence for that case.”
Establishes the reason for reversing the probation revocation in one case.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant's probation was revoked in two separate cases. In one case, the probation period had already ended before the revocation. In the other c…
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 Probation Revocation cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant’s probation having been revoked in two cases, Nos. 64-9573 and 65-2661, he now appeals.
The state concedes that the probation period for Case No. 64 — 9573 had already ended prior to the revocation and that the court, therefore, lacked jurisdiction to impose further sentence for that case. See Fla.Stat. § 948.04, F.S.A. See also Carroll v. Cochran, Fla.1962, 140 So.2d 300.
The appellant has not argued in his brief the assignments of error directed to Case No. 65-2661; and they are therefore abandoned, 2 Fla.Jur., Appeals § 130. We, therefore, find no error in the sentence imposed in Case No. 65-2661.
Accordingly, the sentence imposed in Case No. 64-9573 was improper and is hereby set aside. The sentence imposed in Case No. 65-2661 is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part.
It is so ordered.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Clay v. Louie L. Wainwright, 470 F.2d 478 (5th Cir. 1972)…ort, stated as follows: “In view of the expiration of the original eighteen months probation, and the Court of Record in and for Manatee County having lost jurisdiction over petitioner as to probation (see F.S. 948.04, Streeter v. State of Florida, 211 So. 2d 32 (1968), Brooker v. State, 207 So. 2d 478, Fla. (1968), and the foregoing findings, I recommend that an order be entered providing that: .... (4) That the respondent discharge the petitioner from custody and that the petitioner not be held to answer…
Authorities Cited
- Carroll v. Cochran, 140 So. 2d 300 (Fla. 1962)
- Bell v. Cochran, 140 So. 2d 300 (Fla. 1962)