DAVID HARVEY BOOTH, 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.
A sentence imposing additional prison time for failure to pay a fine is improper for an indigent defendant.
Appellant, an indigent, was convicted under Florida narcotic laws and sentenced to the maximum prison term and a substantial fine. The sentence includ…
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.
Appellant was charged and convicted under the narcotic laws of the State of Florida. He appeals his judgment and sentence, presenting three points on appeal. We find no merit in points one and three. However, point two is well taken.
Appellant, an indigent, was sentenced to the maximum of five years in prison and $5,000 fine. The sentence also provided that if appellant failed to pay the fine he would have to serve an additional year in prison.
In this court’s recent opinion in Dunn v. State, 247 So.2d 26, filed April 14, 1971, we held that under the U. S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Williams v. Illinois, 399 U.S. 235, 90 S.Ct. 2018, 26 L.Ed.2d 586 (1970), a sentence as imposed against an indigent in the case sub judice is improper and must be modified.
Accordingly, that portion of the sentence which provides that if appellant fails to pay the $5,000 fine he must serve an additional year in prison is vacated. In all other respects the judgment and sentence are affirmed.
Affirmed as modified.
LILES, Acting C. J., and HOBSON and MANN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. Illinois, 399 U.S. 235 (U.S. 1970)
- Dunn v. State, 247 So. 2d 26 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971)