SAMMIE LEE ELLIS, 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.
Trial court lacked authority to revoke community control portions of a Youthful Offender sentence for violations occurring before October 1, 1983, but properly revoked adult probation for a post-sentence offense.
A trial court lacks authority to revoke community control portions of a Youthful Offender sentence for breaches occurring prior to October 1, 1983, but may revoke adult probation even if it had not yet commenced at the time of the violation.
[1] Trial courts lack authority under Chapter 83-131, § 20 to revoke community control portions of Youthful Offender sentences for violations occurring prior to October 1, 19…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceEllis received a Youthful Offender sentence with community control and an adult probation sentence. He committed a burglary in violation of the superv…
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 Effective Date Of Statutes cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
We agree with Lollis v. State, 449 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) that the trial court lacks authority to revoke the community control portions of a Youthful Offender sentence for a breach — in this case, a burglary — of the supervision program which occurred prior to October 1, 1983, the effective date of Chapter 83-131, § 20, Laws of Florida. See Lane v. State, 470 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985) (trial court had authority to revoke community control for post-October 1, 1983 violation, noting distinction with pre-October 1,1983 conduct) and cases cited; Moore v. State, 463 So. 2d 406 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (same). On this basis, the sentences now under review in Cases 80-6004, 80-7504, and 80-12112 are vacated without prejudice to proceedings before the Parole and Probation Commission with respect to these charges.
There is no error, however, in revoking Ellis’s “adult” probation in Case 80-11738, even though it was not formally to commence until the conclusion of his Youthful Offender sentences, and therefore had not yet begun when the offense was committed. Stafford v. State, 455 So. 2d 385 (Fla. 1984); Williamson v. State, 388 So. 2d 1345 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Accordingly, the judgment and sentence in Case 80-11738 are affirmed.
Affirmed in part, vacated in part.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Grosse v. State, 511 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)…nal limitations imposed by Rule 3.800, it is well-established that denial of a motion under the rule is not appeal-able. However, this court could choose to treat this appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari, as the Second District did in Smith, 471 So. 2d 640.…
Authorities Cited
- Vendul Oliver Stafford v. State, 455 So. 2d 385 (Fla. 1984)
- Williamson v. State, 388 So. 2d 1345 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- Lollis v. State, 449 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- Lane v. State, 470 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- Clement Moore v. State, 463 So. 2d 406 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)