LOUCIOUS EARL WILLIAMS, APPELLANT,
v.
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.
Loucious Earl Williams appeals his convictions and sentences for seven felonies and six misdemeanors, challenging the sentencing imposed by the trial court. The appellate court affirms the convictions and the youthful offender status designation, but reverses and remands for resentencing on the felony charges because the imposed sentence exceeds the statutory maximum.
The trial court erred in imposing a four-year sentence plus two-year community control term on the felony charges, as this violates the statutory maximum of five years total imprisonment and community control for third-degree felonies. The case is reversed and remanded for resentencing, with Williams eligible for a combined maximum of five years.
[1] A sentence for a third-degree felony may not exceed five years imprisonment and community control combined.
[2] A court may depart from recommended sentencing guidelines to sentence a defendant as a youthful offender.
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 going to depart from the recommended range and sentence appellant as a youthful offender pursuant to section 958.04, Florida Statutes (1983)”
Establishes that the trial court exercised discretion to depart from guidelines and impose youthful offender status, which was not challenged on appeal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWilliams pled guilty to five counts of petit theft (second-degree misdemeanors), one count of criminal mischief (first-degree misdemeanor), one count …
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 Youthful Offender Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHOONOVER, Judge.
Appellant, Loucious Earl Williams, appeals from the judgments and sentences entered against him in connection with seven felony charges and six misdemeanor charges. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
Appellant pled guilty to five counts of petit theft, one count of criminal mischief, one count of grand theft, and six counts of burglary. The five counts of petit theft were second-degree misdemeanors, each punishable by a sentence of up to sixty days. §§ 812.014(2)(c), 775.082(4)(b), Fla. Stat. (1983). The charge of criminal mischief was a first-degree misdemeanor punishable by a term of imprisonment not exceeding one year. §§ 806.13(l)(b)2, 775.-082(4)(a), Fla.Stat. (1983). The grand theft and burglary charges were all third-degree felonies, each with a statutory maximum sentence of five years imprisonment. §§ 810.02, 812.014(2)(b), 775.082(3)(d), Fla. Stat. (1983).
The sentencing guidelines scoresheet presented to the trial court indicated a recommended sentence of twelve-to-thirty-months incarceration or community control. The trial court stated that, for rehabilitation of appellant’s attitude, the court was going to depart from the recommended range and sentence appellant as a youthful offender pursuant to section 958.04, Florida Statutes (1983). Appellant was adjudicated guilty of all thirteen charges and was sentenced to serve sixty days on each of the petit theft charges and one year on the criminal mischief charge. Appellant was sentenced on each of the seven felony charges to four years in state prison followed by two years community control. All sentences were to be served concurrently. This appeal timely followed.
Appellant does not contend that the court erred in sentencing him as a youthful offender. See Massaro v. State, 449 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). He contends, correctly, that the court erred in sentencing him on the felony charges to four years imprisonment followed by two years community control where the crimes involved were third-degree felonies that carry a maximum sentence of five years. State v. Milbry, 476 So. 2d 1281 (Fla.1985). We, accordingly, reverse and remand for resentencing on the felony charges. Appellant may be resentenced to no more than a five-year total sentence of imprisonment and community control. Milbry.
Reversed and remanded.
RYDER, C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Allen v. State, 515 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…d that appellant’s sentences of six years for each of his third degree felony offenses are illegal, and must be reduced to a maximum of a five year total sentence of imprisonment and community control for each conviction. See also Williams v. State, 485 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). Appellant also argues that a trial court may not pronounce consecutive sentences for a defendant designated as a youthful offender. This point is controlled by Harmon v. State, 397 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), wherein this c…
-
Travis v. State, 549 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)…entenced to twelve months incarceration to be followed by six years probation — again, a sentence in excess of the statutory maximum. Accordingly, resentencing is required. See Calhoun v. State, 522 So. 2d 509 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Williams v. State, 485 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). As a condition of probation the trial judge revoked Travis’ driver’s license for six years. Travis contends that this sanction is not a reasonable condition of probation; he makes his living as a long-distance truck driver. We…
-
Goodwin v. State, 553 So. 2d 372 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)…that the trial court erred in sentencing him in excess of the statutory maximum of five years for the grand theft convictions. See §§ 958.-04(2)(a) and 775.082(3)(d), Fla.Stat. (1987); State v. Milbry, 476 So. 2d 1281 (Fla.1985); Williams v. State, 485 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). Accordingly, we reverse his sentences for grand theft and remand for resentencing. His convictions for all charges and sentences for burglary are affirmed. LEHAN, A.C.J., and FRANK and PARKER, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Livingston Milbry, 476 So. 2d 1281 (Fla. 1985)
- Massaro v. State, 449 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)