HARVEY
v.
MAYO, PRISON CUSTODIAN
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 Florida Supreme Court held that a life sentence imposed on a petitioner was invalid due to an insufficient information charging him as a second offender. The court remanded the case for further proceedings, allowing the state to refile a proper information or for the trial court to impose sentences for unpunished crimes, accounting for time served.
No, the information was insufficient to charge the petitioner as a second offender. Consequently, the life sentence imposed was invalid.
“On authority of the rule announced in Perry v. Mayo, Fla., 72 So. 2d 382, the life sentence imposed in this case is held invalid, and the 'information is held insufficient to charge petitioner as a second offender.”
This quote establishes the core holding regarding the invalidity of the sentence and the insufficiency of the charging document.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe petitioner received a life sentence based on an information alleging four distinct prior convictions. However, the information failed to specify 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 Second Offender Status cases and more on FLexlaw
THOMAS, Justice.
On authority of the rule announced in Perry v. Mayo, Fla., 72 So. 2d 382, the life sentence imposed in this case is held invalid, and the 'information is held insufficient to charge petitioner as a second offender. The information contains allegations of four distinct convictions but is silent as to date of commission of offenses subsequent to the first conviction and term of sentence imposed for any conviction.
The petitioner is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. If the state attorney can file an information properly charging the petitioner as a second or fourth offender, then he should do so, otherwise the trial court should impose sentences for the crimes for which the petitioner has not been punished. In either event the trial court is directed to take into account the time already served by the petitioner pursuant to the improper sentence and such “gain” time as he has earned. If it appears that the sentences imposable under either course exceed the combined time served and gained, petitioner shall be returned to the state prison, otherwise he shall be discharged.
ROBERTS, C. J., and DREW and BUFORD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Taylor v. State, 558 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)…second conviction relied upon by the State to sentence a defendant as an habitual offender must be subsequent to the defendant’s preceding conviction. This rule continues to be followed. Lovett v. Cochran, 137 So. 2d 572 (Fla.1962); Harvey v. Mayo, 72 So. 2d 385 (Fla.1954), cert. denied, 349 U.S. 965, 75 S.Ct. 898, 99 L.Ed. 1287 (1955); Perry v. Mayo, 72 So. 2d 382 (Fla.1954); Snowden v. State, 449 So. 2d 332 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), quashed on other grounds, 476 So. 2d 191 (Fla.1985); Shead v. State, 367 So. 2…
-
Lovett v. Cochran, 137 So. 2d 572 (Fla. 1962)…e the first, came after the preceding conviction and met the rule. Obviously there could have been no compliance with this construction when the second and third offenses were charged to have been perpetrated the same day. See Harvey v. Mayo, Fla., 72 So. 2d 385; Cohen v. Mayo, Fla., 77 So. 2d 787. We are impelled to discharge the petitioner from the present sentence and to remand him to the custody of the Circuit Court of the Ninth Judicial Circuit in Seminole County for prosecution as a second offender,…
-
Sandsbury LEE v. State, 217 So. 2d 861 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969)…In so sentencing the appellant, he shall be given credit for all time served under the adjudication in Case No. 44805 and under any sentence heretofore imposed in Case No. 37976 and such “gain” time as appellant has earned. Harvey v. Mayo, Fla.1954, 72 So. 2d 385. This may result in a release of the defendant from custody. For the foregoing reasons, the order appealed is reversed and remanded for proceedings in accordance with this opinion. CROSS, J., and KELLY, RICHARD, Associate Judge, concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Perry v. Mayo, 72 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 1954)