M.T.H. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

M.T.H. v. State

676 So. 2d 77, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 7152, 1996 WL 382335

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 10, 1996

DocketNo. 95-00373

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 676 So. 2d 77 (M.T.H. 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

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

Pincite

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

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

676 So. 2d 77, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 7152, 1996 WL 382335, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mth-v-state-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack