ALAN L. PRUNTY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE; DAVID ROBERT MYDER, APPELLANT, V. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Statutory Sentencing Limits cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Each appellant seeks review of an allegedly excessive sentence imposed following his voluntary plea of guilty to an amended information charging attempted robbery contrary to Sections 812.13 and 777.04, Fla.Stat. (1975). The information as amended contained no allegations concerning use of a firearm, deadly weapon, or other weapon. See Sections 812.13(2)(a) and 812.13(2)(b), Fla.Stat. (1975). Each appellant was adjudicated guilty of attempted robbery.
The information as amended alleged an attempt to commit the offense proscribed by Section 812.13(2)(c) Fla.Stat. (1975). The maximum term of imprisonment for this offense is five years. Section 777.-04(4)(c), Fla.Stat. (1975). The sentences imposed on appellants are thus excessive and illegal. The sentences are vacated and the cases are remanded for proper sentencing under Sections 812.13(2)(c) and 777.04(4)(c), Fla.Stat. (1975). Appellants need not be present for resentencing.
BOYER, Acting C. J., and SMITH and BOOTH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Arthur v. State, 391 So. 2d 338 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)…mean, however, that attempted robbery with a deadly weapon will be an offense equal to robbery with a deadly weapon. Rather, it will continue to be a lesser degree felony as Section 777.04 provides. 374 So. 2d 543 at 545. Also see Prunty v. State, 360 So. 2d 147 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). As a general rule criminal statutes are to be strictly construed and where a statute is susceptible of differing constructions, the construction most favorable to the accused should be adopted. State ex rel. Washington v. Rivki…
-
McGARRY v. State, 496 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 1986)…ion logically flows by implication from the many cases holding that a defendant may appeal an illegal sentence even when imposed pursuant to a valid and voluntary plea. See, e.g., Robbins v. State, 413 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Prunty v. State, 360 So. 2d 147 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Smith v. State, 358 So. 2d 1164 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). Even though clearly contemplated by the plea agreement, the order for consecutive sentences is an illegal sentence because it punishes by forty-six years imprisonment conduct f…