M.T.H. v. State

676 So. 2d 77, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 7152, 1996 WL 382335
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 10, 1996·No. No. 95-00373·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

M.T.H. appeals his delinquency adjudication for fraudulent use of a credit card, burglary, and petit theft. We affirm his adjudication. Because M.T.H.’s terms of community control extend beyond the date he would reach his nineteenth birthday, we reverse his dispositions. See § 39.054(4), Fla. Stat. (1993); C.P. v. State, 674 So.2d 183 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); S.P. v. State, 664 So.2d 1064 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). On remand, the trial court may reimpose a term of community control not exceeding M.T.H.’s nineteenth birthday. Because the trial court also erred by imposing a general disposition, we further remand for entry of separate disposition orders for each of M.T.H.’s offenses. H.L.L. v. State, 595 So.2d 223 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).

Adjudication affirmed, dispositions reversed, and case remanded with instructions.

FRANK, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND and WHATLEY, JJ., concur.

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

M.T.H. v. State, 676 So. 2d 77, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 7152, 1996 WL 382335 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

676 So. 2d 77 (M.T.H. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

T.J. v. State
743 So. 2d 1158 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)
Strayer v. State
676 So. 2d 77 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)