Ivey v. State

327 So. 2d 219
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedFebruary 11, 1976
Docket47249
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 327 So. 2d 219 (Ivey v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ivey v. State, 327 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 1976).

Opinion

327 So.2d 219 (1976)

Warren Allison IVEY, Jr., Petitioner,
v.
STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 47249.

Supreme Court of Florida.

February 11, 1976.

Jack O. Johnson, Public Defender, and Steven H. Denman and Harold H. Moore, Asst. Public Defenders, for petitioner.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Robert J. Landry, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

OVERTON, Justice.

This cause is before us on petition for writ of certiorari to review a decision of the Second District Court of Appeal reported at 308 So.2d 565 (Fla.App.2nd, 1975). In it the District Court considered whether six months' time petitioner had spent in county jail as a special condition of a two-year probationary sentence should be credited to a jail sentence later imposed by the trial court following revocation of that probation. The probation was revoked for a violation of its terms, and a three-year jail sentence imposed. The District Court held Section 948.06(2), Florida Statutes (1973), to be controlling, and refused to credit the six months' county jail time toward petitioner's newly imposed jail sentence.

The District Court decision is in conflict with our recent decision in State v. Jones, 327 So.2d 18 (Fla. 1976).[1]

The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. We dispense with oral argument. So much of the decision of the District Court that denies crediting the county jail time is quashed, and the cause is remanded with directions to credit petitioner with the time he served in the county jail as a special condition to the initial probation sentence. State v. Jones, supra; see North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 89 S.Ct. 2072, 23 L.Ed.2d 656 (1969). In all other respects the decision is affirmed.

It is so ordered.

ADKINS, C.J., and ROBERTS, BOYD and ENGLAND, JJ., concur.

NOTES

[1] We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. (1972).

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

Related

Robinson v. State
827 So. 2d 345 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Leicht v. State
679 So. 2d 1257 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
Davis v. State
518 So. 2d 966 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
DeLaughter v. State
337 So. 2d 848 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1976)
Carpenter v. State
334 So. 2d 170 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1976)
Smith v. State
330 So. 2d 481 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1976)
Freeman v. State
329 So. 2d 413 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
327 So. 2d 219, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ivey-v-state-fla-1976.