Medina v. State

604 So. 2d 30, 1992 WL 206396
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedAugust 26, 1992
Docket91-02835
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 604 So. 2d 30 (Medina 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
Medina v. State, 604 So. 2d 30, 1992 WL 206396 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

604 So.2d 30 (1992)

Jose MEDINA, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 91-02835.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

August 26, 1992.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Deborah K. Brueckheimer, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Brenda S. Taylor, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

CAMPBELL, Acting Chief Judge.

Appellant argues that the court had no authority to impose probation beyond the maximum statutorily permissible term. We agree.

Appellant was convicted of grand theft, a third degree felony, the statutory maximum for which is five years. §§ 812.014(2) and 775.082(3)(d), Fla. Stat.(1989). From January 18, 1990 to August 13, 1991, a period of one year and two hundred and seven days, appellant was on probation. Appellant violated his probation and, on August 13, 1991, the court imposed two years community control followed by two years probation on the grand theft conviction. This illegally extended appellant's probation by two hundred and seven days. See Servis v. State, 588 So.2d 290 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991).

Appellant also argues that the court erred by imposing certain special conditions of probation without orally announcing them. He objects to other conditions as being vague or improper. However, appellant failed to either object or file a motion to strike, and has waived these arguments on appeal. See Brunson v. State, 537 So.2d 692 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).

We vacate appellant's sentence and remand for proceedings consistent herewith.

PARKER and BLUE, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Maddox v. State
760 So. 2d 89 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2000)
Barber v. State
747 So. 2d 954 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)
Jackson v. State
654 So. 2d 234 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Maxlow v. State
636 So. 2d 548 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
Fisher v. State
625 So. 2d 134 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
Summers v. State
625 So. 2d 876 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
Giannandrea v. State
621 So. 2d 582 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
Bolton v. State
619 So. 2d 412 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
Reed v. State
616 So. 2d 592 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
Olvey v. State
609 So. 2d 640 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
604 So. 2d 30, 1992 WL 206396, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/medina-v-state-fladistctapp-1992.