RENALTLO JOSEPH REINO, 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.
Conviction for breaking and entering with intent to commit petit larceny affirmed, but probation term following jail sentence vacated as unauthorized under Florida law.
A sentence imposing probation following a county jail term for breaking and entering with intent to commit petit larceny is improper under Florida Statute § 948.01(4), which does not authorize probation to follow a jail sentence.
[1] Florida Statute § 948.01(4) does not authorize the imposition of probation following service of a county jail sentence.
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 intelligenceAppellant was convicted of unlawfully and feloniously breaking and entering a building in Dade County with intent to commit petit larceny and was sent…
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 Intent to Commit a Misdemeanor cases and more on FLexlaw
RICHARDSON, GEORGE, Jr., Associate Judge.
Appellant seeks reversal of his conviction of unlawfully and feloniously breaking and entering a, building located in Dade County, Florida, with intent to commit a misdemeanor therein, to wit: petit larceny, for which he was sentenced to Dade County jail for a term of six (6) months and thereafter placed on probation for a term of eighteen (18) months.
The merits of the points of error assigned in this appeal have been carefully reviewed and it is concluded that appellant has failed to demonstrate that reversible error was committed during the trial proceedings. Accordingly, the judgment and conviction herein is affirmed.
However, in light of the opinion by this court in Williams v. State, Fla.App.1973, 280 So. 2d 518, in which it was held that § 948.01(4) Fla.Stat., F.S.A. did not make provision for adding a period of probation to follow service of the term for which the defendant was committed to the county jail. That portion of the sentence which made provision for probation for a period of eighteen (18) months after the serving of the six (6) months sentence in the county jail, was unauthorized and improper. The sentence is modified to eliminate therefrom the provision for probation.
It is so ordered.