Cox v. State

468 So. 2d 437, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1117
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 3, 1985
Docket84-1500
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 468 So. 2d 437 (Cox 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
Cox v. State, 468 So. 2d 437, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1117 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Opinion

468 So.2d 437 (1985)

Anthony Jerome COX, a/K/a Albert A. Himmway, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 84-1500.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 3, 1985.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Paul C. Helm, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Frank Migliore, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

SCHEB, Judge.

Defendant pled nolo contendere to charges of burglary of a dwelling and grand theft. The trial judge adjudicated him guilty and placed him on concurrent terms of fifteen-years probation for the burglary and five years probation for the grand theft. Subsequently, at a revocation hearing, the defendant admitted violating several conditions of probation. The trial judge decided not to revoke defendant's *438 fifteen-year probation for burglary; however, he revoked his five-year probation for grand theft. The court sentenced defendant to five years imprisonment for the latter offense to run concurrently with the remaining portion of the fifteen-year term of probation.

Defendant now contends the trial court erred by imposing concurrent terms of probation and imprisonment. We agree.

A defendant cannot serve a prison term and be on probation simultaneously. Brudie v. State, 467 So.2d 1113 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). See also Roy v. State, 207 So.2d 52 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967). Therefore, we construe the trial court's sentencing order as interrupting defendant's term of probation for the period of incarceration imposed on the theft charge. Thus, upon release from prison, defendant shall receive a credit for time actually served in prison against the then remaining portion of his fifteen-year term of probation.

Accordingly, we affirm defendant's conviction and sentence for grand theft. We affirm defendant's conviction for burglary and his term of probation as herein construed.

GRIMES, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.

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

Related

STATE OF FLORIDA v. EDWARD FIDDEMON
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2020
Warren L. Oliver v. State
201 So. 3d 210 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2016)
Schurman v. State
847 So. 2d 569 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)
Mitchell v. State
654 So. 2d 265 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Jackson v. State
615 So. 2d 850 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
Walker v. State
604 So. 2d 913 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Porter v. State
585 So. 2d 399 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Delk v. State
510 So. 2d 1209 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Martire v. State
486 So. 2d 681 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
468 So. 2d 437, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cox-v-state-fladistctapp-1985.