Goodwin v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Goodwin v. State

553 So. 2d 372, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2834, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6856, 1989 WL 147966

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 8, 1989

DocketNo. 88-03586

StatusPublished

This text of 553 So. 2d 372 (Goodwin 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

Goodwin v. State, 553 So. 2d 372, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2834, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6856, 1989 WL 147966 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was charged with two counts of burglary and two counts of grand theft. He pleaded guilty to all charges. The trial court imposed adult sanctions and pursuant to the youthful offender statute, sentenced appellant, on each count, to six years’ incarceration, to be suspended after four years, with the remaining two years to be served on community control. All sentences were to run concurrently.

Appellant correctly contends that the trial court erred in sentencing him in excess of the statutory maximum of five years for the grand theft convictions. See §§ 958.-04(2)(a) and 775.082(3)(d), Fla.Stat. (1987); State v. Milbry, 476 So.2d 1281 (Fla.1985); Williams v. State, 485 So.2d 45 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). Accordingly, we reverse his sentences for grand theft and remand for resentencing. His convictions for all charges and sentences for burglary are affirmed.

LEHAN, A.C.J., and FRANK and PARKER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was charged with two counts of burglary and two counts of grand theft. He pleaded guilty to all charges. The trial court imposed adult sanctions and pursuant to the youthful offender statute, sentenced appellant, on each count, to six years’ incarceration, to be suspended after four years, with the remaining two years to be served on community control. All sentences were to run concurrently.

Appellant correctly contends that the trial court erred in sentencing him in excess of the statutory maximum of five years for the grand theft convictions. See §§ 958.-04(2)(a) and 775.082(3)(d), Fla.Stat. (1987); State v. Milbry, 476 So.2d 1281 (Fla.1985); Williams v. State, 485 So.2d 45 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). Accordingly, we reverse his sentences for grand theft and remand for resentencing. His convictions for all charges and sentences for burglary are affirmed.

LEHAN, A.C.J., and FRANK and PARKER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

553 So. 2d 372, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2834, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6856, 1989 WL 147966, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goodwin-v-state-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack