Nase v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Nase v. State

746 So. 2d 469, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 12710, 1997 WL 716537

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 12, 1997

DocketNo. 96-01999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 746 So. 2d 469 (Nase 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

Nase v. State, 746 So. 2d 469, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 12710, 1997 WL 716537 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

CAMPBELL, Judge.

Appellant was convicted after a jury trial of attempted handling and fondling.of a child under sixteen years of age and was sentenced to four years’ probation and, as a special condition of that probation, to sixteen months’ incarceration. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred because his sentence exceeds the five-year maximum sentence for the offense for which he was convicted. We agree.

The State concedes that a probationary split sentence cannot exceed the statutory maximum for the offense, which in this case is five years. See Randolph v. State, 626 So.2d 1006 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). Moreover, section 948.03(6), Florida Statutes (1995), provides that a court may not impose more than 364 days of incarceration as a special condition of probation. See Randolph, 626 So.2d 1006; Marin v. State, 624 So.2d 808 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993).

Accordingly, we affirm appellant’s conviction, reverse his sentence, and remand for resentencing.

PARKER, C.J., and THREADGILL, J., concur.

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