JASPER ROBINSON, 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 youthful offender's sentence for a substantive violation of probation may exceed the 6-year cap if the underlying offense's maximum sentence is longer.
Robinson, a youthful offender, admitted to violating probation by using marijuana. He was sentenced to 10 years, exceeding the 6-year cap for technica…
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 Substantive Violation Of Probation cases and more on FLexlaw
W. SHARP, Judge.
Robinson admits violating his probation in two criminal eases.1 He was sentenced in case number 93-2135 to a 10-year term, which he argues on appeal, is illegal because it exceeds the 6-year cap for youthful offenders. At the time Robinson was convicted of this crime, he was only 16 years old, and he was sentenced as a youthful offender. We affirm.
Section 958.14, Florida Statutes (1993) provides:
[N]o youthful offender shall be committed to the custody of the Department for a substantive violation [of probation or com munity control] for a period longer than the maximum sentence for the offense for which he was found guilty ... or for a technical or a non-substantive violation for a period longer than 6 years or for a period longer than the maximum sentence for the offense for which he was found guilty, whichever is less ...
This section permits a youthful offender to be sentenced to a term longer than 6 years, after revocation of probation if the violation is substantive. Hill v. State, 692 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Dunbar v. State, 664 So. 2d 1098 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Johnson v. State, 678 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996).
In this case, Robinson claims his violations of probation were only technical. However, he admitted to the use of marijuana and to testing positive for marijuana in connection with his probation revocation. This is an admission of a criminal offense. See § 893.13, Fla. Stat. (1995). Committing a new criminal offense is a substantive violation of probation.2 Thus Robinson can be sentenced in excess of the 6-year limit for youthful offenders. His sentence is within the statutory maximum for robbery.3
AFFIRMED.
DAUKSCH and ANTOON, JJ., concur. . Robbery in case number 93-2135; robbery and grand theft in case number 95-25895.
. See Thomas v. State, 585 So. 2d 475 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).
. Fifteen years. §§ 812.13(2)(c) and 775.082(3)(c), Fla. Stat. (1993).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (13 total)
-
State v. Meeks, 789 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 2001)…id not reveal whether violation was substantive or technical); see also Quiles v. State, 777 So. 2d 992 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Escutary v. State, 753 So. 2d 650 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Johnson v. State, 736 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Robinson v. State, 702 So. 2d 1346 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Hill v. State, 692 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Johnson v. State, 678 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); Dunbar v. State, 664 So. 2d 1093 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Reeves v. State, 605 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). While no Florida de…
-
Christian v. State, 84 So. 3d 437 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)…ted to his illicit drug use. As such, he argues that this violation must be classified as technical or nonsubstantive, and that he could only be sentenced to six years in prison. We reject this argument based upon our precedent in Robinson v. State, 702 So. 2d 1346 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) (holding that illicit drug use, because it is also a crime, constitutes a substantive violation of youthful offender probation).1 In Robinson, as in this case, the state did not file new charges based upon the illicit drug use.…
-
Waymon M. Swilley v. State, 781 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…r nonsub-stantive violation.” Courts examining the Youthful Offender Act have defined “substantive violation” as a new, separate criminal offense by a youthful offender. See Meeks v. State, 754 So. 2d 101, 103 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Robinson v. State, 702 So. 2d 1346, 1347 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). See also Johnson v. State, 678 So. 2d 934, 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996) (holding youthful offender’s commission of grand theft, burglary, possession of burglary tools and resisting arrest without violence are substantive violati…
Previewing 3 of 13 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Alfred v. State, 678 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
- Oliveri v. State, 692 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)
- Thomas v. State, 585 So. 2d 475 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)