JEDADIAH EDWARD MCGLOCKING, 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.
A recommendation for youthful offender treatment is not the same as being sentenced as a youthful offender.
The defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for armed robbery, escape, and kidnapping, with a recommendation for youthful offender treatment. He appea…
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 Treatment cases and more on FLexlaw
HARRIS, Judge.
Jedadiah Edward McGlocking was eighteen years old when he was sentenced to 124 months imprisonment for armed robbery with a firearm or deadly weapon, an additional two years imprisonment for escape, and thirty years on probation for kidnapping. The court orally announced that he would “recommend that as to both of these sentences you be treated as a youthful offender.” This recommendation was also included in the written sentence.
McGlocking contends on appeal that the court erred when it “sentenced” him as a youthful offender to a term in excess of that permitted by section 958.04, Florida Statutes. We must decide whether a recommendation to the Department of Corrections that the prisoner be accorded “youthful offender treatment” is the same as being sentenced as a youthful offender. We conclude that it is not and affirm the judge.
It appears to us that the judge was aware of the sentencing limitations contained in section 958.04 and elected, because of the seri ousness of the charges against the defendant, to sentence him in accordance with the guidelines. Because of the defendant’s youth, however, the court “recommended” that he be given whatever youthful offender treatment might be available and appropriate such as enhanced vocational, educational, counsel, and public service opportunities and separation from older and more experienced criminals. See section 958.021, Florida Statutes.
Since the court has the unquestioned authority to sentence the defendant under the facts of this case as a youthful offender with or without the Department’s approval, it seems odd indeed that if it intended to so sentence McGloeking that it would merely “recommend” such treatment. We believe that there is a difference between sentencing one as a youthful offender on the one hand and, on the other hand, recommending that he receive youthful offender treatment while, as a young man, he is serving his sentence.
AFFIRMED.
DAUKSCH and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Baker v. State, 705 So. 2d 76 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)…ot actually imposed under the youthful offender statute. It is true that the court merely recommended the youthful offender classification and that such a recommendation is not the equivalent of a youthful offender sentence. See McGlocking v. State, 689 So. 2d 1175 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). Nevertheless, the Department has authority under the statute to classify an inmate as a youthful offender. Section 958.08(5), Florida Statutes, defines a “youthful- offender” as “any person who is sentenced as such by the court…