RONALD SANDS, 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.
Ronald Sands appealed his probation revocation and five-year penitentiary sentence, arguing that an illegal condition requiring enrollment in a drug program after one year in county jail made the original probation order invalid. The Florida appellate court affirmed, holding that the probation condition was valid because the jail time was imposed in a separate case, not as a condition of probation.
The court affirmed the probation revocation and sentence. The court held that while imposing county jail time as a condition of probation is illegal, the probation order in this case was valid because the one-year county jail sentence was imposed in a separate case, not as a probation condition. The probation order merely referenced the timing of when the drug program enrollment must begin relative to the completion of the jail sentence in the other case.
[1] A sentence imposing one year in county jail as a condition of probation is illegal.
[2] Probation in one case may be ordered to commence after a jail sentence in another case.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“a sentence imposing one year in county jail as a condition of probation is illegal”
Establishes the general rule against jail time as a probation condition
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSands was originally placed on five-year probation with a condition requiring him to enroll in a drug program after serving one year in county jail. T…
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
[*117] PER CURIAM.
Defendant, Ronald Sands, appeals a sentence to five years in the state penitentiary imposed by the trial judge after a probation revocation hearing.
Sands alleges that it was error to revoke probation and impose such sentence since the trial judge originally placed him on five years probation with the condition that he “must start drug program, if available, in county jail. Must be enrolled in drug program by probation office after one (1) year served in county jail,” which Sands claims is illegal.
We acknowledge that a sentence imposing one year in county jail as a condition of probation is illegal, and we have been definitive as to the invalidity of such sentences. See Williams v. State, Fla.App. 1973, 280 So. 2d 518 and Durham v. State, Fla.App.1974, 304 So. 2d 146. However, we agree with the State’s contention that in this case, the facts do not fall under the Williams or Durham rationale. The defendant’s argument is based upon the inaccurate factual representation that one year in the county jail is a condition of probation. The record reflects that the defendant had been sentenced to serve one year in county jail in another case and that “one year served in county jail” mentioned by the court in the order of probation in this case merely defines the time when the condition of enrolling in the drug program must begin. Thus, the probation was ordered for five years only, with no sentence to county jail. Probation in one case to follow a jail sentence in another case is valid. Dade County v. Baker, Fla.1972, 265 So. 2d 700.
In addition, we note that before this appeal from the order revoking probation and imposing a sentence of five years in the state penitentiary, Sands never filed a timely appeal or other challenge to the legality of the order placing him on probation.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sanford K. Bronstein v. State, 355 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)…ead to separate convictions and separate sentences, even though committed with regard to the same instrument. Norwood v. Mayo, 74 So. 2d 370 (Fla.1954). Second, probation to follow jail sentences in separate convictions is valid. See Sands v. State, 313 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 3d DCA, 1975). Sub judice, appellant was sentenced upon his conviction of multi- [*819] pie counts of forgery, uttering a forged instrument and grand larceny. The sentence amounted to jail time on counts one through fifty-four and probation on…
-
Willner v. State, 350 So. 2d 1108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)…ve years probation on count III to begin after defendant serves his term in the county jail on count I, as probation in one case to follow a jail sentence in another case is valid. See Dade County v. Baker, 265 So. 2d 700 (Fla.1972); Sands v. State, 313 So. 2d 116 (Fla.3d DCA 1975). Affirmed.…
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 280 So. 2d 518 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)
- Dade Cnty. v. Honorable Paul Baker, 265 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 1972)
- Durham v. State, 304 So. 2d 146 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)