JAMES HARRIS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 1991-03-20
No. 90-1780
ANSTEAD and WARNER, JJ., and WALDEN, JAMES H., (Retired) Associate Judge, concur.
576 So. 2d 426 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1991) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that the amended law should not have been applied retroactively and a probation condition of nine years imprisonment was invalid.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant's sentence was imposed based on an amendment to Florida law that took effect after the offenses occurred. The trial court also imposed an in…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We reverse and remand the appellant’s sentence. The amendment to Chapter 88-131, Section 1, Laws of Florida, should not have been applied in this ease because the offenses occurred prior to its taking effect. See Castle v. State, 330 So. 2d 10 (Fla.1976). The maximum sentence that could have been imposed, therefore, is seven years, the top of the recommended guidelines range plus the permissible one cell escalation for violation of probation.

The trial court imposed a special probation condition of nine years imprisonment. This was improper. A probation condition of incarceration which equals or exceeds one year in the county jail is invalid. See Section 948.03(7), Florida Statutes (1987); Villery v. Florida Parole and Probation Comm’n, 396 So. 2d 1107 (Fla.1985).

Lastly, the appellant argues that the trial court failed to credit him gain time on his original sentence. A review of the record fails to disclose whether the trial court considered gain time in affording the appellant credit towards his sentence. Accordingly, on remand, the trial court should award the appellant any gain time to which he is entitled by law.

REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS CONSISTENT HEREWITH.

ANSTEAD and WARNER, JJ., and WALDEN, JAMES H., (Retired) Associate Judge, concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Williams v. State, 591 So. 2d 295 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
    …inement imposed as a special condition.” Poore v. State, 531 So. 2d 161, 164 (Fla.1988). According to Villery, a special condition of probation is limited to less than one year, or no more than 364 days. Villery, 396 So. 2d at 1111; Harris v. State, 576 So. 2d 426, 427 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). The trial court sentenced Williams to one year, or 365 days, which exceeded the sentencing limit by one day. Yet, even though a sentencing error exists, because Williams has already served the term of imprisonment the matte…
  • Young v. State, 600 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)
    …PER CURIAM. Reversed and remanded for resentencing on Count I with directions that appellant be given appropriate credit for not only prior jail time but also prison time already served on Count I including gain time. See Harris v. State, 576 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). The state concedes that the appellant’s judgment and sentence mistakenly refers to Count II, rather than Count I, and that appellant is entitled to proper credit against any sentence imposed on Count I. ANSTEAD and GUNTHER, JJ…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw