Milton v. State

461 So. 2d 127, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 112, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15811
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 8, 1984·No. No. 83-1769·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinions

COBB, Chief Judge.

In this case, the trial judge revoked the defendant’s probation which had commenced in July of 1982, and imposed sentence in November, 1983, without utilizing the sentence guidelines, which the trial judge found to be inapplicable on the basis that the sentence related back to the time probation was imposed. This approach is reflected in the dissenting opinion of Judge Campbell in Boyett v. State, 452 So.2d 958 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). This court, however, previously has adopted the Boyett majority view. See Mack v. State, 458 So.2d 347 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Rutlin v. State, 455 So.2d 1347 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); O’Brien v. State, 454 So.2d 675 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Dunn v. State, 454 So.2d 641 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). The First District Court of Appeal also agrees with Boyett. See Duggar v. State, 446 So.2d 222 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).

On authority of the foregoing cases, we vacate the sentence imposed and remand for sentencing in accordance with the sentencing guidelines. See In Re Rules of Criminal Procedure (Sentencing Guidelines), 439 So.2d 848 (Fla.1983).

SENTENCE VACATED; REMANDED.

DAUKSCH and FRANK D. UP-CHURCH, Jr., JJ., concur.

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

Milton v. State, 461 So. 2d 127, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 112, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15811 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

461 So. 2d 127 (Milton v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Milton
475 So. 2d 670 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1985)