Albert v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Albert v. State

755 So. 2d 821, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 5158, 2000 WL 509839

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 1, 2000

DocketNo. 1D99-4429

StatusPublished

This text of 755 So. 2d 821 (Albert v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Albert v. State, 755 So. 2d 821, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 5158, 2000 WL 509839 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court revoked appellant’s probation and sentenced him to a term of 12 years incarceration. On appeal, appellant argues that the trial court acted in the absence of jurisdiction since the violation of probation warrant was not delivered to the sheriff for execution until the day after the probationary term expired. See State v. Boyd, 717 So.2d 524 (Fla.1998). Although this argument was not presented to the trial court, an error of this sort is fundamental in nature. See Tatum v. State, 736 So.2d 1214 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). The state properly concedes that under the circumstances, appellant is entitled to relief. Accordingly, we vacate the revocation of probation and the judgment and sentence imposed thereon. No motion for rehearing will be entertained, - and the clerk is directed to issue mandate forthwith.

ERVIN, VAN NORTWICK and BROWNING, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The trial court revoked appellant’s probation and sentenced him to a term of 12 years incarceration. On appeal, appellant argues that the trial court acted in the absence of jurisdiction since the violation of probation warrant was not delivered to the sheriff for execution until the day after the probationary term expired. See State v. Boyd, 717 So.2d 524 (Fla.1998). Although this argument was not presented to the trial court, an error of this sort is fundamental in nature. See Tatum v. State, 736 So.2d 1214 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). The state properly concedes that under the circumstances, appellant is entitled to relief. Accordingly, we vacate the revocation of probation and the judgment and sentence imposed thereon. No motion for rehearing will be entertained, - and the clerk is directed to issue mandate forthwith.

ERVIN, VAN NORTWICK and BROWNING, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

755 So. 2d 821, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 5158, 2000 WL 509839, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/albert-v-state-fladistctapp-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack