Parent v. State

312 So. 2d 482, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 14961
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 9, 1975·No. No. 74-884·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals his probation revocation and sentence thereunder. We affirm on the premise of Brown v. State, 305 So.2d 309 (4th D.C.A.Fla.1974):

“[F.S. 924.06] clearly limits this appeal to review of proceedings that occurred after the entry of the order of probation.”

Appellant has collaterally questioned his original sentence. We are not unaware of Farhat v. State, 293 So.2d 723 (1st D.C.A. Fla.1974), in which a felony judgment on insufficient evidence limited any sentencing thereafter if probation were revoked, but deem it inapplicable to this circumstance because appellant here did not timely appeal his adjudication and sentence as did the defendant in Farhat. We affirm with no restrictions upon appellant’s right to make a motion under F.R.Cr.P. 3.850, if there is any question of new evidence.

Affirmed.

WALDEN, MAGER and DOWNEY, JJ., concur.

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

Parent v. State, 312 So. 2d 482, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 14961 (Fla. Ct. App. 1975).

312 So. 2d 482 (Parent v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brown v. State
305 So. 2d 309 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1974)
Farhat v. State
293 So. 2d 723 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1974)