RENE DE LA PAZ, 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.
De La Paz appeals the revocation of his probation and resulting five-year concurrent sentences. The court reversed, finding that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to mitigate legal sentences and that the probation order was a nullity, making the probation revocation sentence illegal.
The trial court lacked jurisdiction to mitigate legal sentences; it could only correct illegal sentences. The probation order was therefore a nullity, making the sentence imposed for violation of probation illegal. The original sentences as corrected must be reinstated with credit for time served.
[1] A court is without jurisdiction to mitigate legal sentences previously imposed.
[2] A court has jurisdiction to correct an illegal sentence.
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“The court was without jurisdiction to mitigate the legal sentences imposed.”
Establishes the core legal principle that trial courts lack authority to reduce sentences that are legally imposed.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDe La Paz was originally sentenced on April 20, 1971, to multiple one-year sentences in Dade County jail. On September 24, 1971, the trial court held …
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 Correction Of Illegal Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendant appeals an order revoking probation and a sentence of two concurrent terms of five years. The State accepts appellant’s statement of facts, which reveals the following: The defendant was sentenced on April 20, 1971, to four one year sentences in the Dade County jail to be served concurrently with another one year sentence, and a one year sentence, also in the Dade County jail, to be served at the expiration of the concurrent one year sentences.1 On September 24, 1971, the court held a hearing on defendant’s motion to mitigate the sentences. At this time, the court also corrected the sentences in light of the holding in State v. Evans, 225 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969). The court set aside the sentence that was to be served consecutively so that it would be served concurrently with the other sentences. Finally, the court mitigated the four concurrent sentences to a sentence of the time already served, plus seven years probation. (The court denied the motion to mitigate the one year sentence to which the four concurrent one year sentences attached.)
The court was without jurisdiction to mitigate the legal sentences imposed. See Collins v. State, 343 So. 2d 680 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). However, the court did have jurisdiction to correct the illegal sentence. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.800(a), and see the principle of law in Perrin v. Enos, 56 So. 2d 920 (Fla.1951). Therefore, the only legal sentences were the four concurrent sentences of one year in the Dade County jail to run concurrently with another one year sentence. The order placing the defendant on probation was a nullity. Accordingly, the sentence imposed for violation of the probation is an illegal sentence.
The defendant shall be returned to the trial judge with directions to reinstate the original sentences as corrected, the defendant being given credit for any time served on the original sentence and the sentence that is now vacated. Cf. Solomon v. State, 341 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977).
Reversed and remanded with directions.
. Therefore, in summation, defendant was to serve a one year sentence (sentence one) to run concurrently with four other one year sen-fences (sentences two, three, four and five) and then to serve a consecutive one year sentence (sentence six), all in the Dade County jail.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Robbins v. State, 413 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…DCA 1973).4 The order placing Robbins on probation was void ab initio and all proceedings flowing from the probation are also a nullity. Therefore, the sentence imposed for violation of the probation is an illegal sentence. See De La Paz v. State, 358 So. 2d 1093 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 359 So. 2d 1220 (Fla.1978); Williams v. State, supra; Ware v. State, 231 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970). Accordingly, the order appealed is reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court with directions to discharge…
-
State v. Golden, 382 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)…f the prior understanding of the parties before the judge. On September 9, 1979 the judge entered his order modifying the sentence of July 28 and the State appealed, relying on State v. Smith, 360 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); De La Paz v. State, 358 So. 2d 1093 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1978); and State v. Mancil, 354 So. 2d 1258 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). We affirm the order before us. The hearing of July 16, 1979 was within the 60-day limit. At that time the judge effectively enlarged the period of time in which he could e…
-
Stoddard v. State, 388 So. 2d 11 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)…uthority by placing him on probation, because the granting of probation does not constitute mitigation of a legal sentence. State v. Evans, 225 So. 2d 548 (Fla.3d DCA 1969); State v. Mancil, 354 So. 2d 1258 (Fla.2d DCA 1978). In De La Paz v. State, 358 So. 2d 1093 (Fla.3d DCA 1978), the defendant was sentenced to four one-year sentences in April, 1971. In September, 1971, the court held a hearing on the defendant’s motion to mitigate these sentences and at that time placed the defendant on seven years probati…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Evans, 225 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)
- Solomon v. State, 341 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)
- Perrin v. Enos, 56 So.2d 920 (Fla. 1951)
- Collins v. State, 343 So. 2d 680 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)