ROBERT L. ANDREWS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
McCORD, Judge.
This is an appeal from judgment and sentence of appellant for injuring telephone lines in violation of § 822.10, Florida Statutes, and breaking or injuring fences in violation of § 821.09, Florida Statutes. Each of these offenses is a felony in the third degree and carries a maximum penalty of five years in the state prison. Appellant was sentenced to concurrent sentences of seven years on each offense as a second or subsequent offender but the procedure in prosecutions for such offenders as set forth in § 775.11, Florida Statutes, was not complied with. The convictions of appellant are affirmed but the sentences are reversed and vacated and the cause is remanded with directions to enter legal sentences for the convictions giving appellant credit for all time served on the illegal sentences.
RAWLS, Acting C. J., and MILLS, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Moore v. State, 324 So. 2d 690 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)….1973, effective October 1, 1975, evidences legislative intent that the provisions of § 775.084, which continues in effect, be utilized in accordance with due process of law independent of former § 775.11. In our recent decision in Andrews v. State, 316 So. 2d 296 (Fla.App. 1st, 1975), we remanded a case for resentencing in somewhat similar circumstances. There, how [*692] ever, the State confessed error in the sentence under review, and so we did not have the opportunity to consider the question here decided…
-
Arnaldo Valdes v. State, 510 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…of not more than sixty days, § 775.-082(4)(b), Fla.Stat. (1985). Since, as the state concedes, the jury did not find that the value of the property damage exceeded $200, the trial court erred in imposing a three year sentence. Cf. Andrews v. State, 316 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975) (sentence of seven years of imprisonment for criminal mischief reversed where statutory maximum sentence five years and procedure for enhanced sentencing for habitual offender not properly followed). Since Valdes’s score sheet to…
-
McSHAY v. State, 321 So. 2d 464 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)…t be considered prior to imposition of sentence, since that record does not demonstrate that appellant had ever been convicted of a prior felony.” Id. at 788-789. See also, Sharp v. State, 303 So. 2d 56 (Fla.App.4th 1974); contra, Andrews v. State, 316 So. 2d 296 (Fla.App.1st 1975). We hold that although the trial court failed to follow the requirements of Fla. Stat. § 775.11, the failure is not reversible error as Fla.Stat. § 775.11 has since been repealed. Affirmed. OWEN and MAGER, JJ., concur.…